WOMEN IN 
NATIONAL 
POLITICS 


Record of Women’s Committee 
National Hughes Alliance 
1916 




























WOMEN 


IN 

NATIONAL POLITICS 


WOMEN’S COMMITTEE 
NATIONAL HUGHES ALLIANCE 
Room 705, 

35 W. 39th St., New York 
1916 





J' 

\ 


. ■ } 



t 

f 




4 


V 


i 


I 


* / 


c 




f 

it ' 




• • 


I 


f 


: 

\ ■ 



'■ / 

* « 


M 

y 







1 




A 


Vt 


V » 





By transfer 
White House. 


V 






i 

t' 




f 


t 


0 


. . / < 

[ •■ *'. '■ 




; t 



I f ‘•1 r 

Jt'? V’^ ./ 


;* 

- .! i 

•t f. , 


0 

> •! 

'■ ‘‘' i *i 

t*' ‘» 1 , • ,, 

• * S k • ^ ^ 

, 


» 

f Lt 

i t 

^•'7 

/?i ■••':'■,''I '■• ■• 


i ‘ 


ii' i 'i -' 

' ■ 

, k 


■ \ 


’• 

V.*' ‘ 

I' 1 


f 


I: j 




hL 




; 7 _i> 


\ ' 

• ' v.V ' ■ 




* ■' * i 




'■ I ' • *> 

A.V’J ', 

'v V ■ 


viv-V*:- •'' '• 

' ■M'V/;;' 




' 1 


I' 


V !»: vv ^•.. 


■(.! 




! ■ ; 


^4 




t.i, 






I ' •' ' 


l! 






v/f 

; ■ S 


i 


S r 


Xi 


« .»1i 




^. d 


: .i 


L 


I 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

FoREwmo .......... 4 

Women in the Campaign.5 

General Organization ........ 6 

Report of Work: 

Administration ......... 7 

Research .......... 9 

Publicity .......... 10 

Finance . . . . . . . . . . ,14 

The Hughes Women’s Campaign Train . . . . .15 

Organization and Management . . . . . . .18 

Publicity .......... 19 

For Future Reference ........ 25 

Financial Summary ......... 28 

Appendices : 

1. Comments on Hughes Campaign Service ... 29 

H. Comments on Women’s Campaign Train . . .31 

HI. Editorial Comments on Hughes Campaign Train . . 34 




Foreword 



HE Women’s Committee of the 


Hughes Alliance is publishing a re¬ 


port of its work in the recent cam¬ 
paign because it believes that its many 
thousands of contributors, workers and 
members should know what was done 
and how it was done. We believe that the 
work of this Committee has a message for 
women in future American political cam¬ 
paigns. 

There is a second reason for this report. 
The deliberate misrepresentation concern¬ 
ing the women’s work has grown to such 
proportions that we believe the public is 
entitled to the facts regarding the women’s 
campaign in general and the women’s 
campaign train in particular. The wom¬ 
en’s movement in national politics has 
come to stay. This report covers some¬ 
thing of its manner of coming and may 
have a message for those interested in the 
manner of its staying. 


Women in the Campaign 


The Republican and Progressive Con¬ 
ventions held in Chicago in June carried 
one clear message to all voters alike—that 
this was to be no ordinary campaign, and 
that it could neither be judged by previous 
campaigns nor run by old time methods. 
The situation was a blur through which 
there must emerge new alignments of men 
and women, the restoration of old friend¬ 
ships, the creation of new sympathies and 
the re-establishment of shattered faiths and 
contracts. In addition the Republicans had 
chosen a candidate who was unknown to 
many voters and who needed interpreta¬ 
tion. 

Some of us thought the restoration of the 
principles of co-operation, efficiency and 
fair-play in the Republican campaign more 
important than any issues which might 
emerge during the struggle. We thought 
that the country would base its judgment 
upon the records and motives of the can¬ 
didates, and we proposed, concerning Mr. 
Hughes, to give these to the public in the 
fullest measure. 

There were two objects in the attempt 
to bring the women of America together 
nationally behind the Republican candi¬ 
date. One was to safeguard the splendid 
service and recognition which women had 
achieved as the result of the Progressive 
movement of 1912. Women will long re¬ 
member that it was the Progressives who 
asked a woman to second the nomination 
of a Presidential candidate; who put a 
woman on the Executive Committee of its 
National Committee and appointed a 
woman in charge of its educational work. 
In the general confusion of 1916, in which 
Progressive principles were not represented 
by a distinct organization and candidate, 
the woman’s movement in politics was 
likely to lose its national significance with¬ 
out some definite conservation movement. 

The immediate practical object was to 
get votes for Mr. Hughes and the women 
saw two ways in which they could be of 


service—in attracting and holding the vote 
of Progressive and independent women, 
and in interpreting Mr. Hughes’s record 
and personality to the voters of the coun¬ 
try. We felt that with or without ballots 
we were in a position to render service 
which would help the women voters who 
did not know the candidate. 

In order to accomplish these tasks, we 
set ourselves another,—a task of complete 
organization, the results of which will en¬ 
dure in political life long after the imme¬ 
diate fortunes of candidates are forgotten. 
No women’s organization in either of our 
great national parties has ever been self- 
created, self-directed and self-supporting; 
it has never had initiative, power, resources 
and scope not subject to arbitrary veto by 
men; it has never been accepted on terms 
of equality evidenced by participation in 
policies, plans, counsels, etc. In a consid¬ 
erable measure the women in the Hughes 
Alliance achieved these ideals, and the gen¬ 
eral education of political leaders along 
these lines has been not the least of the 
women’s contribution to the campaign. 

If we are to have a sound political life 
in America and a government representa¬ 
tive of all the people, sometime and some¬ 
where these principles of co-operative ac¬ 
tion must be universally established. The 
vote alone will not accomplish, indeed has 
not accomplished this for the voting women 
of the west. The Women’s Committee of 
the Hughes Alliance laid this foundation so 
deep, that though it failed in some im¬ 
portant respects, it so advanced women’s 
participation in party matters that the 
party that reckons without them in the 
coming elections will fail of success. Had 
the Republican party applied broadly 
throughout the suffrage states these funda¬ 
mental principles which were applied in 
the Hughes Alliance, even the appeal of 
“peace and prosperity” could not have car¬ 
ried the women’s vote against Mr. Hughes. 
Oregon and Illinois, which, more than any 


5 


other suffrage states recognized the equal¬ 
ity and representation of women, and had 
the strongest Hughes Alliances, gave ma¬ 
jorities to Mr. Hughes. 

We had a clean, sound organization, free 
from personalities, observant of the truth, 
scrupulous about facts, and ready to give 
credit where it was due. Although we 
published hundreds of thousands of pieces 
of campaign literature, not one of our state¬ 
ments was ever challenged. We raised no 
class, sectional or personal issues, and met 
the allegations of the opposition with can¬ 


dor and forbearance and such facts as the 
paid hecklers at the meetings of the wom¬ 
en’s train would permit us to present. 
When the newspapers have finished ridi¬ 
culing the women’s movement in politics, 
and have ceased hailing the campaign train 
as the “golden special” run across the coun¬ 
try by rich women for purposes of social 
diversion, the public will learn that a real 
contribution has been made to the sound 
political education of the women of this 
country. The manner and method of this 
contribution are related in this report. 


General Organization 


The Women’s Committee of the Hughes 
Alliance was organized on a temporary 
basis and for the sole purpose of working 
for the election of Mr. Hughes. It pledged 
itself to work for no local candidates. It 
thus created an organization through 
which Republicans, Democrats, Progres¬ 
sives, Socialists, everyone who believed in 
Mr. Hughes could work for him without 
giving support to any local tickets. Be¬ 
cause of this limitation, it could not and 
never did undertake the organization or 
direction of the Republican party women’s 
organizations or work, since their activity 
included both national and local Republi¬ 
can tickets. So early as July 10, the Wo¬ 
men’s Committee called attention to the 
fact that the Republican party women 
were without national representation and 
were unorganized, and recommended to the 
candidate and to the Chairman of the Re¬ 
publican National Committee the appoint¬ 
ment of a woman’s campaign committee to 
do for the women of the country what was 
being done for the men. Such a commit¬ 
tee was not appointed until September 21. 
The Women’s Bureau started at Chicago 
about September 2, under the direction of 
a man failed to satisfy anyone. 

The first conference to launch a wo¬ 
man’s movement for Mr. Hughes was held 
on June 13th, three days after the Chicago 
convention adjourned. 

The first question to be settled was 
whether to have a separate organization of 
women or to join the Hughes Alliance 
which had just been revived. It was de¬ 


cided to become the Women’s Committee 
of the Hughes Alliance. Women political 
leaders have learned that they are still in 
much the same position as trade unionists 
—that the rank and file of women can se¬ 
cure individual recognition and equal op¬ 
portunity to work with men only when 
they are part of a collective body with 
power and purpose. The experience of 
the Hughes campaign only emphasized the 
wisdom of our choice. 

On June 17 a plan of organization and 
work was submitted to Mr. Hughes and 
approved, before a chairman of the Repub¬ 
lican National Committee had been ap¬ 
pointed. The Hughes Alliance authorized 
the appointment of a women’s committee 
and agreed that women should have repre¬ 
sentation upon its national executive com¬ 
mittee and upon state executive com¬ 
mittees. 

The Women’s Committee retained full 
control of its work, prepared its own bud¬ 
get and raised its own funds while at the 
same time establishing a close co-operation 
with the various phases of the men’s work. 
As an illustration, it contributed one-half 
of the amount of a number of contributions 
that were sent to Hughes Alliances in suf¬ 
frage states, and its “Campaign Service” 
was furnished to all men’s Alliances. 

At a conference on July 7, the plan of 
organization was approved, permanent offi¬ 
cers and an executive committee elected 
and a $100,000 budget was authorized. 
The Committee opened its headquarters 
immediately at the Hotel Astor where it 


6 


remained until August 4, when it re¬ 
moved to the Republican National Head¬ 
quarters at 511 Fifth Avenue. It adopted 
a constitution on July 12. Mrs. Willard 
Straight made the first contribution of 
$5,000, enabling the committee to begin its 
work at once. 

1 he Women’s Roosevelt Committee, 
which was organized before the conven¬ 
tions met in Chicago requested that they 
be authorized to become the Women’s New 
York City Committee of the New York 
State Alliance. In order to avoid duplica¬ 
tion of work this request was granted, and 
about July 21 the name of the Committee 
was changed. The Women’s Committee of 
the National Hughes Alliance agreed to 
finance this work through the New York 
State Committee. This agreement was 
carried out. 

On July 7, Mrs. Harry Payne Whitney 
held a reception for Mr. and Mrs. Hughes 
at which some 400 women, representing 
many states had opportunity to discuss with 
the candidate the questions that interested 
them most. These women represented 
active w’orkers in the Hughes Alliance, and 
this general meeting with the candidate 
brought them together along the national 
lines that formed the dominant principle 
of the women’s organization. 

It was advisable and necessary to adjust 
our work somewhat to that of the men’s 
alliance. It was agreed that in all non¬ 
suffrage states, women’s committees should 
follow, not precede the organization of 
men’s Hughes Alliance branches. The 
formation of the latter was somewhat de¬ 


layed in many states. This accounts for 
the failure of the women’s committees to 
work in certain states. In all suffrage 
states the women’s committee went to work 
at once, and by July 20 had five organizers 
in the suffrage states. This number was 
later increased to eleven. The Women’s 
National Committee also agreed to finance 
all women’s work in the National Hughes 
Alliance and supported all women’s work 
in New York State, including that of the 
New York City Committee. In order to 
co-ordinate the work the Women’s Com¬ 
mittee asked that women be placed on the 
Executive Committee of the National 
Committee and on the State Executive 
Committee. This was done in many in¬ 
stances. Contribution funds to Hughes 
Alliance branches in suffrage states were 
shared with the men’s National Commit¬ 
tee, as were also all headquarters expenses. 
All agreements made between the Wo¬ 
men’s National Committee and the men’s 
Hughes Alliance were carried out. The 
Women’s Committee testifies with the 
greatest pleasure to the scrupulous fidelity 
and the consistent co-operation of the 
head of the National Hughes Alli¬ 
ance. 

In accordance with its plan of organiza¬ 
tion and its budget, the work of the Wo¬ 
men’s Committee was organized in four de¬ 
partments: administration, research, pub¬ 
licity and finance. This work was handled 
by a headquarters staff of thirteen persons, 
besides the requisite clerical force, and 191 
branch Hughes Alliances, chiefly in the 
suffrage states. 


Report of Work 

Administration 


The division of administration included 
office management, supplies and direction 
of field work. 

The Committee had eleven field organ¬ 
izers of which five devoted their time to 
the suffrage states. The first field repre¬ 
sentative was sent out on July 12. They 
first made an analysis of the political situa¬ 
tion in each state as it affected women, and 
then organized branches of the Hughes Al¬ 
liance. They placed their services at the 


disposal of the Republican state chairman, 
and in some states, like Nevada, worked en¬ 
tirely under his direction. Charters were 
issued to branch Hughes Alliances, and en¬ 
rollments were largely in local branches 
although several thousand women enrolled 
directly with the National Committee. To 
the enrolled workers were sent suggestions 
for work in their districts as well as sup¬ 
plies of literature and buttons. A summary 
of the daily reports received from field offi- 


7 


cers was sent to state and local chairmen 
throughout the country so that they might 
know what was going on and receive sug¬ 
gestions from the work in other states. 

Much of the time and the energy of the 
field workers in the early part of the cam¬ 
paign was devoted to finding out in every 
state where leading Progressives stood, and 
in bringing together groups of individuals, 
who while disposed toward Mr. Hughes 
were, so to speak, without definite organ¬ 
ization and a particular candidate in this 
campaign. In some states the strength, or 
the habit, of the Republican state or¬ 
ganization made it frankly impossible to 
get independents and Republicans to work 
together for Hughes. Fearing what 
seemed to be potentially a rival political 
organization, “old line” Republicans some¬ 
times opposed the formation of Hughes 
Alliances. In other states, however, it was 
not only possible to form them, but both 
sides welcomed the practical organization 
scheme thus presented to them by national 
organizers. 

The field workers saw both Republican 
and Progressive state chairmen and Re¬ 
publican and Progressive National Com¬ 
mitteemen. They worked with leading 
Republicans and Progressives, both men 
and women, for their one object: the or¬ 
ganization of the women’s independent 
vote for Hughes. In starting branches, the 
organization committee formed by the 
organizer always represented many groups 
differing widely in both social and political 
interests. If there already existed a wo¬ 
men’s organization which could be 
strengthened on a broader basis for the 
campaign, this was done. 
r’ This work of local organization was not 
/ easy. From almost all the states the or¬ 
ganizers reported the same thing—general 
preoccupation with the state and local 
tickets and marked lack of interest in the 
national situation. Local voters and local 
political organizations urged the organizers 
to help with state and congressional tickets, 
to which the national candidate was to be 
attached by courtesy. The organization 
work of the National Women’s Committee 


demonstrated clearly and indubitably the 
real political weakness of this country, an 
insistent localism and sectionalism, in which 
the local organizations of the two great 
national parties have acquiesced. In state 
after state, men and women organized and 
worked with energy and spirit for local 
candidates. For them a vote based upon 
belief and conviction was cast. In the very 
same states the vote cast for the national 
candidate was often sentimental, indiffer¬ 
ent, casual, unreasoned. Local squabbles 
on local issues held up organization on the 
national issues. Meetings were called 
nominally for the national candidate. 
Actually, his name was sometimes not even 
mentioned. It is impossible to pass swiftly 
over these difficulties in the path of our 
organizers; for after all they eptomize the 
fatal lack, not only in this campaign, but 
in American political life as a whole. 

Aside from the work of organization the 
organizers transmitted much valuable in¬ 
formation to the central office; they showed 
what state issues must in reason be taken 
into account in any plans made at head¬ 
quarters; they informed headquarters that 
apparent sectional preoccupation was often 
only remoteness, and that if the proper ap¬ 
proaches were made, and the proper in¬ 
terest shown by the national organization, 
there would be no difficulty in arousing in¬ 
terest in the national ticket; they showed 
what lines of approach from headquarters 
would most substantially interest hitherto 
unorganized women and get them to join 
the national organization for active work 
along national as well as state and local 
lines. 

Post-election reports from a number of 
states show us that the organizations thus 
stimulated by the organizers have entered 
upon the inter-campaign interval with a 
heightened sense of the value of political 
organization, and a determination to main¬ 
tain it along new lines. The fact that 
politics may be and must be “civics” at its 
best, has gained some headway as the re¬ 
sult of the very difficult task of organiza¬ 
tion in what was undoubtedly a very diffi¬ 
cult campaign. 


8 


Research 


It is significant that the first piece of 
work undertaken by the Women’s Commit¬ 
tee was a piece of research, a careful study 
of Mr. Hughes’s position on labor and im¬ 
portant public questions as demonstrated by 
his acts and opinions during the four years 
of his governorship. This work was begun 
in June. And throughout the summer a 
research bureau was kept busy securing 
the data used and analyzed in other de¬ 
partments of the campaign. 

For the research, a regular force of 
workers was retained, but these were as¬ 
sisted, in special subjects and studies, by 
legal experts and distinguished economists. 
Among the more definite services of the 
Research Department were: collecting and 
assisting in verifying the material for the 
records of Mr. Hughes as governor, which 
as mentioned elsewhere was recast by the 
Publicity Department and issued as an 84- 
page pamphlet; collecting and abstracting 
laws affecting labor enacted during Mr. 
Hughes’s administration; summarizing his 
more important Supreme Court decisions; 
preparing a report on Governor Hughes 
and agricultural interests and legislation in 
New York State; reporting especially 
upon the insurance investigation and legis¬ 
lation in New York State; collecting regu¬ 
larly articles in the current periodicals and 
in books bearing on the issues of the cam¬ 
paign, and furnishing them to headquar¬ 
ters workers and others, to guide their ef¬ 
forts by showing the state of the public 
mind on certain questions at various times 
and in given sections of the country. 

To give further direction to the cam¬ 
paign the Research Department made a 
political analysis of presidential elections to 
show the historical tendency of the vari¬ 
ous political parties in the various states. 
This data, when balanced by information 
concerning the appeal of the issues of the 
current campaign in various states and sec¬ 
tions, showed where special emphasis 
should have been placed. It is to be re¬ 
membered, of course, that the Women’s 
Committee was at no time able to follow 
out all its convictions and all its judg¬ 
ments. Limited in authority and in re¬ 
sources, it had to forego many opportuni¬ 
ties uncovered by its studies. 


Speakers’ data on Americanization, pre¬ 
paredness, the National Guard, and other 
important issues was furnished to the 
Speakers’ Bureau of the Publicity Depart¬ 
ment of the Republican National Commit¬ 
tee. A real effort was made by the Wo¬ 
men’s Committee to make Americanism a 
dominant issue instead of a mere campaign 
slogan—curiously enough adopted by both 
parties. We do not feel that we succeeded. 
And the reason we did not is perhaps the 
same reason why the election resulted as it 
did. Americanism means nationalism—a 
sense of the country as a whole, and a de¬ 
votion to it. The election was decided by 
a great mass of voters who put sectional 
prosperity above national consciousness, and 
sometimes state tickets above the national. 
In expounding Americanism, the Women’s 
Committee had no desire to flay the hy¬ 
phen. But it did want to present the ap¬ 
peal of nationalism,—^Americanism,—in its 
political logic to the three million or more 
foreign born voters in this country. It also 
wanted to show that this country, if Amer¬ 
icanism is to prevail, must have a national 
policy for educating immigrants and pre¬ 
paring them for citizenship. As a part of 
this object the Research Department pre¬ 
pared for campaign speakers the citizenship 
statistics of cities throughout the country, 
giving the native or foreign-born character 
of the population, percentage of inability 
to speak English, illiteracy, etc. 

The Research Department also under¬ 
took an analysis of the Seaman’s Law. This 
was a very careful piece of work, covering 
a month’s research. It showed that the law 
was not being enforced in certain essential 
particulars, a charge substantiated by no 
less a person than Andrew Furuseth in a 
public statement after election. 

One of the most significant pieces of 
work was the paralleling of Mr. Hughes’s 
and Mr. Wilson’s records as governors of 
their respective states. Very much the 
same questions relating to immigration, 
Americanization, labor, the protection of 
children, unemployment, the protection of 
savings, were presented to both men as gov¬ 
ernor and the New York State record pre¬ 
sented a marked contrast to that of New 
Jersey. Mr. Hughes’s record as Justice 


9 


in many respects paralleled that of the 
President on such questions as the eight- 
hour day for working women, child labor, 
recognition of trade unions, enforcement of 
pure-food laws, etc. It was news to most 
people that it was Mr. Hughes who gave 
the first eight-hour day to trainmen, signal¬ 
men and telegraphers; that eleven child- 
labor laws were passed as against Mr. Wil¬ 
son’s two as governor; and that in all 56 
subsequent labor laws, one-third of the 
whole number of labor laws in the New 
York statutes, were passed during Hughes’s 
administration. 

If more emphasis had been given 
throughout the campaign to an affirmative 
statement of what Mr. Hughes stood for 
as shown by what he did; if there had been 
less generalizing on the tariff and on Mex¬ 
ico and less criticism of Mr. Wilson, the 
election returns might have told a different 
story. Far too many speeches dealt with 
Republican “principles” not very clearly 
set forth, and not very efficacious as against 
“peace and prosperity”; there was too little 
mention of the candidate’s practical record 
and achievements. 

Labor Research.—The importance giv¬ 
en to the labor appeal in this campaign by 
the Democratic claims of virtue based on 
the so-called eight-hour bill, and the na¬ 
tional child-labor bill and by the persistent 


attempt to make Mr. Hughes appear to be 
the “Wall Street candidate,” the corpora¬ 
tion lawyer with interests alien to those of 
wage earners, made the Women’s Commit¬ 
tee resolve to present Mr. Hughes’s signifi¬ 
cant record on labor at every opportunity. 
The Committee spared no effort in doing 
so. For the whole campaign period they 
retained a labor expert, a former Commis¬ 
sioner of Labor of New York State, a 
member of organized labor in good stand¬ 
ing. He prepared regularly for the 
Hughes Campaign Service an accurate 
statement of Governor Hughes’s record on 
child labor, on workmen’s compensation; 
on the administration of the New York 
State Labor Department in his Governor¬ 
ship; on improvements in factory inspec¬ 
tion, etc., etc. He also analyzed the Dan¬ 
bury Hatters’ Case, the Arizona Alien 
Case and other cases and opinions in which 
Governor Hughes clearly showed his atti¬ 
tude toward labor. Throughout the latter 
part of the campaign and in the speeches 
on the Campaign Train the Committee 
gave much effort to a clear analysis of the 
Adamson bill. The Research Department 
of the Women’s Committee co-operated 
with the other departments in a real effort 
to place the political fight on the firm and 
decent ground of real argument and sound 
appeal. No campaign can flourish without 
its laboratory. 


Publicity 


The Publicity Department of the Wom¬ 
en’s Committee prepared, published and 
distributed the first literature available in 
the campaign. 

It initiated an important innovation in 
campaign procedure—the weekly publica¬ 
tion of a regular campaign organ. It con¬ 
ducted a foreign language service on an un¬ 
pretentious scale when it found that this 
work was not being done elsewhere. It 
maintained a regular speakers’ service in 
order to co-operate with the Republican 
National Committee in providing speakers 
with expert material and arguments; and 
it conducted a daily information service to 
collect and clear to the various departments 
in the Republican campaign headquarters, 
the news of the campaign throughout the 
country. 


In observing this and previous cam¬ 
paigns the Women’s Committee felt (1) 
that campaign literature was not carefully 
enough prepared; (2) that the indiscrimi¬ 
nate reprinting of long speeches was not ef¬ 
fective; (3) that we needed more litera¬ 
ture in short concise form dealing with the 
real arguments of the campaign and the 
real records of the candidates; (4) that we 
needed a more careful distribution of ma¬ 
terial to official workers who could redis¬ 
tribute it to their speakers and others. 

The Women’s Committee believed that 
this was a campaign in which facts would 
count. It also realized that certain facts, 
especially those pertinent to the public rec¬ 
ord of the candidate were by no means in 
general circulation. Nor were they to be 
got together without difficulty. For its 


10 


weekly Campaign Service, for its speak¬ 
ers’ data, for its press statements and for 
the refutation of Democratic allegations 
the Committee wished to clear constantly 
a serviceable body of pertinent facts^ col¬ 
lated with the utmost care for veracity, 
analyzed and interpreted without color. A 
national campaign, far from being a mere 
game in which sophistry is met by sophis¬ 
try, far from being a sword’s play of wits, 
can be an inspiring search for the truth and 
the best means of making it prevail. We 
have not attained to this in this country, 
but there have been promising stirrings on 
the face of the waters. And we believe 
that the idealism, and the steady courage¬ 
ous industry of the Women’s Committee in 
searching out the essential facts and pre¬ 
senting them effectively from the middle of 
last June until November has in it the 
promise, and the condition, of healthful 
political life in this country. 

Hughes Campaign Service.—The week¬ 
ly bulletin, a 12-page magazine published 
during the campaign by the Women’s Com¬ 
mittee, was entirely new in campaign pub¬ 
licity. The history of it should convince 
managers of future campaigns of the 
direct need for a campaign organ: 
(1) to keep distant states and po¬ 
litical organizations in touch with the pro¬ 
gress of the campaign by giving them 
weekly the campaign news from all over 
the country; (2) to furnish speakers, edi¬ 
tors and active campaign managers and 
workers through a regular vehicle with ex¬ 
pert material and arguments on the issues 
and the accurate record of the candidate 
on important questions; and (3) to furnish 
good campaign and propaganda material 
adapted to general readers and independent 
voters. 

The Campaign Service concentrated on 
the national issues, the proved records of 
the candidates, and waged its fight on 
these. It contained no campaign oratory 
and no campaign vilification. The plan of 
publication aimed to include in every issue: 
a part of the candidate’s record; the im¬ 
portance of certain of his Supreme Court 
decisions; a constructive presentation of 
the deficiencies of the Democratic adminis¬ 
tration during the last four years, and the 

• See Appendices I &. II, pp. 29-34. 


fundamental deficiencies in the whole phil¬ 
osophy of the Democratic party; leading 
articles by a Republican and by a Progres¬ 
sive; arguments and data meeting some 
point raised by the Democratic Campaign 
Committee or leaders during the current 
week; general propaganda material with 
“punch” and interest. 

Thirteen bulletins were published, seven 
with an issue of 50,000, one with an issue 
of 35,000 and five with an issue of 25,000. 
It was sent regularly to National and State 
Committeemen and delegates to the Con¬ 
vention. Later at the definite request of 
the Speakers’ Bureau of the Republican 
National Committee it was sent to all 
speakers, at the expense of the Republican 
National Committee. Many requests from 
county chairmen for the Bulletin in con¬ 
siderable numbers for enrolled voters could 
not be met. During the Maine campaign, 
the Maine committeemen requested heavy 
issues of the Bulletin in Maine for the 
three critical weeks of the Maine campaign. 
They later wrote that it had helped greatly 
to turn the tide—or keep it turned—in 
Maine. Similar requests were met for 
North Carolina, Wisconsin, Massachu¬ 
setts. The Bulletin was also distributed 
regularly to 6,000 daily and weekly publi¬ 
cations; to Progressive workers; to Hughes 
Alliance branches; to Republican Gover¬ 
nors, Senators and Congressmen; to the 
Union League Clubs; to field workers and 
Republican clubs. 

The value of a campaign organ, in the 
abstract, is shown by the fact that through 
the Hughes Campaign Service thus regu¬ 
larly issued by the women, the women’s or¬ 
ganization was in much closer touch with 
certain of the local Republican organiza¬ 
tions and prominent campaign workers 
than was the Republican National Com¬ 
mittee, and sometimes had much more di¬ 
rect channels of information and distribu¬ 
tion. 

Throughout the summer and fall the 
heavy daily mail received by the Hughes 
Campaign Service, containing requests, 
criticisms, suggestions and contributions, 
showed it to be a live thing, a real focus 
in the campaign, and a means of national¬ 
izing the campaign work. Extracts from 
some of this correspondence are now re¬ 
printed in the appendix * of this report as 


11 



testimony to a national campaign need and 
the means of meeting it. 

Other Literature.—The most impor¬ 
tant of the other publications of the Wom¬ 
en’s Committee was the Public Record of 
Charles Evans Hughes, issued as a pocket 
pamphlet of 84 pages, for ready reference 
for speakers, editors, etc. His whole pub¬ 
lic record as Governor of New York, his 
acts, his pronouncements, his memoranda of 
approval and of veto for the bills presented 
to him for signature were clearly presented 
and analyzed. They were not interpreted, 
for they did not need to be. Twenty thou¬ 
sand copies of this Record were published 
and distributed by the Women’s Commit¬ 
tee. The Republican National Committtee 
republished and distributed it, under its 
own auspices. The National Hughes Alli¬ 
ance did the same. 

The importance of the early Democratic 
attempts to brand Mr. Hughes as “the 
Wall Street Candidate,” and the enemy of 
labor in general was early recognized by 
the Women’s Committee. It reprinted the 
issue of the Legislative Labor News 
(representing the New York State Federa¬ 
tion of Labor) which in 1910 hailed Mr. 
Hughes upon his withdrawal as the “Great 
Governor” who, in putting through the 
legislature fifty-six separate labor laws had 
proved himself the best friend the New 
York State working man had ever had. 

As the campaign advanced the Demo¬ 
cratic National Committee, supported man¬ 
fully by Mr. Gompers, made increasing 
capital of the Adamson Bill as evidencing 
Mr. Wilson’s devotion to the interests of 
the working man. They also circulated a 
so-called “parallel record” of Mr. Wilson 
and Mr. Hughes on labor. Mr. Hughes’ 
record was presented—or ignored—with a 
flagrant disregard of truth unusual even in 
a political campaign. The Women’s Com¬ 
mittee therefore prepared an accurate and 
detailed statement of Mr. Hughes’s stand 
on labor evidenced not only in his public 
record as Governor of New York, but also 
in his opinions and decisions handed down 
as Justice of the Supreme Court. The 
Labor Record was widely distributed and 
eagerly sought in many parts of the 
country. 

When Mr. Hughes was Governor the 


social workers of New York State openly 
hailed him as the soundest and best legis¬ 
lative friend of social welfare interests. 
But his record in this respect was, naturally 
enough, little known. The general public 
does not always learn of the patient, con¬ 
tinuous attention to the detail of social 
laws, the steadfast championing of this 
minor clause or that, which means every¬ 
thing to a group of child workers perhaps, 
but seems a detail in the general field of 
administration. This is exactly the kind of 
service Mr. Hughes rendered to social wel¬ 
fare. One of the workers who knew his 
record best, the Supervisor of Brooklyn 
Charities, wrote for the Women’s Commit¬ 
tee an explicit statement of his record in 
these respects. Under the title Hughes 
and Social W elf are it was distributed 
widely. 

Later the Women’s Committee also is¬ 
sued three short and effective leaflets on the 
Danbury hatters’ case, the Arizona alien 
case, and the teachers’ equal pay bill. 
The Committee also prepared a practical 
statement of how women, whether in the 
suffrage or non-suffrage states, could help 
in the campaign. Thirty thousand of these 
were issued. In addition to less important 
pamphlets published by the Women’s Com¬ 
mittee, large quantities of the literature is¬ 
sued by the Republican National Commit¬ 
tee and the Hughes Alliance were distrib¬ 
uted by the women’s organization on the 
Campaign Train. 

Daily Press and Magazines.—Infor¬ 
mation received from the field workers and 
local and state chairmen of the Hughes 
Alliance was issued to the press daily and 
sometimes twice a day through the report¬ 
ers assigned to cover the political headquar¬ 
ters. In addition to this, seventy formal 
statements were released by the Women’s 
Committee, besides many interviews and 
special stories. The object of this publicity 
was to give accurate information based on 
direct reports of the Hughes Alliance work¬ 
ers, and to show the interest in campaign or¬ 
ganization among women, and the develop¬ 
ment of it as the weeks went by. 

Foreign Language Press Service.— 
Very early in the campaign the Women’s 
Committee realized that this year more 
than ever, when Americanization was a 


12 


practical issue of the campaign, good pub¬ 
licity material should be issued to the for¬ 
eign language papers. The Committee 
therefore submitted to the Republican Na¬ 
tional Committee and to the men’s 
Hughes Alliance a plan for the handling 
of this division of the work. 

The Republican Committee was very 
slow in undertaking this and the men’s 
committee of the Hughes Alliance did 
nothing with it whatever. The Republi¬ 
can Committee seemed to feel that it would 
increase criticism of their attitude and in¬ 
tensify the popular illusion that they were 
playing for the German vote. As a matter 
of fact, there never was a year when for¬ 
eign language papers needed good political 
material more than they did this year. 
They certainly were entitled to the same 
kind of service that the English papers all 
over the country were receiving, but it was 
not given them. 

Very early in the summer we prepared 
quantities of material adapted to the for¬ 
eign language papers. It was submitted to 
both the Republican National Committee 
and the Hughes Alliance, favorably com¬ 
mented upon, but no definite arrangement 
was made for getting it over. A weekly 
news service to foreign language papers was 
therefore begun by the Women’s Commit¬ 
tee. Other material to the foreign lan¬ 
guage press was later cleared through the 
co-operation of the American Association of 
Foreign Language Newspapers. 

As a result of its foreign language press 
work the Women’s Committee reached cer¬ 
tain clear conclusions which are set forth, 
for suggestion in future campaigns, in the 
last section of this report.* 

Daily Information Service.—One of 
the greatest difficulties in any national cam¬ 
paign is to keep the various states and vari¬ 
ous workers informed as to how the cam¬ 
paign is going, and to keep the central com¬ 
mittee also informed. The Republican Na¬ 
tional Committee and the Campaign Com¬ 
mittee frankly said that they could not get 
information from their local organizations. 
State and county committeemen do not 
always take the trouble to report either the 
conditions of affairs or the process of or¬ 
ganization in their communities. The re¬ 

* See p. 26, paragraph 14, 


suit of the lack of information is: the wrong 
speakers are sent to important places; lit¬ 
erature is sent out indiscriminately instead 
of on the basis of direct information; most 
important of all, the sympathies of local 
workers and local organizations get too far 
away from the national candidate. 

The Women’s Committee had an un¬ 
limited political clipping service, consisting 
of from 2,000 to 7,000 clippings daily from 
all over the country, giving the local politi¬ 
cal news. These were summarized daily 
by an expert force, and the summary was 
issued to Governor Hughes, Chairman 
Willcox, the Republican Publicity Bureau 
and other head workers in the Republican 
National Committee and the Hughes Alli¬ 
ance. It furnished a daily war map for the 
campaign. Every week it was again sum¬ 
marized by states and published in the 
Hughes Campaign Service. 

Speakers’ Bureau.—The Speakers’ Bu¬ 
reau of the Women’s Committee was or¬ 
ganized not to furnish speakers of its own, 
but to co-operate with the Speakers’ 
Bureau of the Republican National Com¬ 
mittee in furnishing campaign speakers 
with material, with reference to the needs 
of particular places and audiences. The 
Bureau also gave special attention to pro¬ 
viding women speakers throughout the 
country with material through the Hughes 
Alliance. Every speaker on the National 
Republican Committee’s list received as 
promptly as possible each issue of the 
Hughes Campaign Service, the Hughes 
Record, the Labor Record, etc., at the 
expense of the National Republkan Com¬ 
mittee. 

New York City Committee Work.— 
The New York City Committee chose as 
its chief work the organization of meetings 
in and around New York City. The meet¬ 
ings organized include receptions to the 
candidate, to suffragists and members of 
other women’s organizations, and beach 
parties with prominent speakers. One of 
the most successful features of the New 
York City Committees’ campaign was the 
opening, in the latter part of the campaign 
period, of empty shops for meetings at noon 
and at other times. These meetings were 
addressed by prominent campaign speakers 
and drew large crowds of voters. 


13 



Finance* 


The Women’s Committee considered 
that in its main function of giving women 
throughout the country a responsible part 
in the campaign it was essential that the 
women should raise their own money, plan 
their own budget and keep within it. 

Budget.—The Women’s Committee did 
all of these things. It raised a total of $132,- 
836.95 throughout the campaign from wo¬ 
men all over the country in contributions 
of from fifty cents up. It apportioned the 
funds to the various divisions of work, and 
then carefully followed the apportionment. 
It received no financial assistance of any 
kind from the National Republican Com¬ 
mittee or the men’s Hughes Alliance. It 
paid its full pro rata share of all expenses 
at headquarters on a basis determined in 
executive committee. Between the men’s 
committees and the women’s there were no 
financial allowances, concessions, favors, or 
“pocket money” provisions. Such “adjust¬ 
ments” were made unnecessary by the busi¬ 
ness like agreements definitely made when 
expenses were shared. The Women’s Com¬ 
mittee lived within its budget, had all its 
bills paid by December 15, and had no de¬ 
ficit. This does not mean that new and 
unexpected needs for money did not con¬ 
front the Committee from time to time; 
it means that when these needs arose, spe¬ 
cial funds were raised to meet them, and 
no piece of work was definitely begun until 
the arrangements for financing it were also 
satisfactorily under way. 

At the beginning of the campaign it was 
estimated that a budget of $100,000 
would be needed to carry on the work well, 
on a national basis. The actual money 
raised for the budget was some $20,000 less 
than the amount estimated. In addition to 
this, however, the Committee raised a sep¬ 
arate fund of $48,873.32, for the train. 
The main budget included many small 
contributions, notably many of one dollar 
each, from women all over the country. 
Since it was necessary to collect the train 
fund in a short time, it was impossible to 
carry on a campaign for a large number 
of small contributions. The actual num¬ 
ber of contributors to the train fund is 231. 


* See Financial Summary, p. 28. 


To the Women’s Committee fund as a 
whole, there were over 1,100 contributors. 

Ofl&ce System.—The name and address 
of each contributor was carded and num¬ 
bered. The original card became a cash 
book. A copy, signed by the treasurer, was 
mailed to the donor as a receipt, another 
copy was filed alphabetically and a third 
copy was filed geographically, by states. An 
account was opened in the Harriman Na¬ 
tional Bank, in the name of the Women’s 
Committee, and the necessary information 
was filed with the Secretary of State, at 
Albany. No supplies were ordered with¬ 
out explicit signed requisitions in duplicate 
from heads of departments, approved by the 
Chairman. Expense accounts of field offi¬ 
cers after being approved by the heads of 
departments and audited were paid weekly 
from a current expense fund. Salaries 
were paid twice each month. 

Policy.—The value of the women’s cam¬ 
paign, in its financial aspect, seems to us to 
be based on its observance of two funda¬ 
mental principles; financial responsibility 
and the independence that accompanies it 
in initiating and conducting work; and sec¬ 
ondly the policy of arousing women all over 
the country to the practical work of raising 
money as an expression of their political in¬ 
terest. We have said that the direct con¬ 
tributors to the train fund were compara¬ 
tively few. But the fact is that the train 
project stimulated local committees of wo¬ 
men in the various towns to undertake the 
work of political organization, often for 
the first time, and to raise their first inde¬ 
pendent political funds. The train meet¬ 
ing was often the first big political meeting 
of the year in a given town. In almost 
every case it was not only organized, but 
financed by women, the men sometimes giv¬ 
ing a band, or contributing the use of a 
hall. Local committees told us that 
often in thus assuming the financial re¬ 
sponsibility for the train meeting they had 
learned the first principles of political 
organization. 

It was an essential part of the financial 
method of the Women’s Committee to keep 
contributors constantly informed concern¬ 
ing expenditures and the progress of the na¬ 
tional work. This policy frankly amazed 


14 



many contributors. When we have estab- spend some time in finding out these 
lished among women a desire to know how things, we shall have taken a big step 
their contributions to campaign and other toward securing social and political respon- 
funds are being used, and a willingness to sibility among women. 

The Hugh es Women’s Campaign Train* 


The train was an eleventh hour attempt 
to rally the women of the country to the 
cause of Mr. Hughes. For weeks the re¬ 
ports of our field workers had been dis¬ 
quieting. They told us that the Republi¬ 
can party women were not being organized, 
that their work was not being stimulated or 
directed; that national activity and interest 
were being delayed by anxiety about saving 
local and state tickets; that there was no 
“ginger”; that the Progressives and Repub¬ 
licans were not getting together; that a 
series of blunders in the west was losing 
voters who had been for Mr. Hughes in the 
beginning; that a critical instead of a con¬ 
structive campaign was having a bad effect; 
that peace and prosperity propaganda was 
making headway, but was not shaking the 
Republican over-confidence; and that the 
women’s bureau in Chicago was paying 
most of its attention to Illinois. The de¬ 
cisive factor, however, in sending the train 
was the fact that the Democrats had suc¬ 
ceeded in putting Mr. Hughes on the de¬ 
fensive—an unlooked for situation, affect¬ 
ing vitally the lines of women’s interests. 
The issues the train prepared to meet 
proved to be the determining factors in the 
campaign. The Democrats had succeeded 
in making them vital by a series of the 
most skilful half truths ever put before an 
American public. 

What were the allegations by which Mr. 
Hughes was put on the defensive? They 
were: 

(1) That he was against labor, as 
shown by the decision in the Danbury hat¬ 
ters’ case; by his veto of the full crew 
bill; by the teachers’ equal pay bill; by 
the Coney Island fare bill. These 
came to be big words in the west. We 
found thousands of people who had heard 
the allegations and but scores who had 
ever heard the answer. Mrs. Raymond 


• See Appendix II, p. 31. 


Robins, the leader of the organized work¬ 
ing women of America dealt with the labor 
questions at the train meetings. To hun¬ 
dreds of thousands of voters—but not to 
all whom the Adamson bill had deluded in 
America—she gave a clear exposition of the 
real meaning of the bill as a minimum 
wage bill, and the viciousness of its man¬ 
ner of enactment in which there was sacri¬ 
ficed that very principle of arbitration 
toward which the working men and wo¬ 
men of America have so long been strug¬ 
gling. The Hughes labor record, the sig¬ 
nificance of his Supreme Court decisions, 
the real answer to the question, “Who took 
the Danbury hatters’ homes away from 
them?” were expounded by Mrs. Robins 
and Mrs. Rheta Childe Dorr. Mrs. Dorr, 
as school editor of the Evening Mail, was 
equipped to present a clear statement of the 
reasons for Mr Hughes’s veto of the teach¬ 
ers’ equal pay bill, a fact which, with many 
misrepresentations, the Democratic Com¬ 
mittee was using widely as campaign mate¬ 
rial among the voting women of the west. 

(2) That Mr. Hughes was against the 
human interests in America and for Wall 
Street. Dr. Katherine Davis and Miss 
Maude Miner, with their records of ser¬ 
vice with Mr. Hughes in New York upon 
measures affecting women and children and 
the social welfare of the state, answered 
these allegations. Most of their listeners 
had never before heard of what he had 
done as governor for working women and 
children, for probation, for tenement life, 
for the fight against tuberculosis. They 
knew nothing about his decisions on the 
pure food laws. 

(3) That he was against suffrage in 
spite of his pronouncement for the Fed¬ 
eral amendment. Much was made of the 
fact that “Mr. Wilson voted for suffrage 
in New Jersey, while Mr. Hughes did not 
in New York.” 

The suffrage issue was dealt with by sev- 


15 



eral of the speakers, Mrs. Robins, Dr. 
Davis, Mrs. Dorr and Miss Freeman. 

(4) That Mr. Hughes lacked a well 
defined policy of Americanism. This alle¬ 
gation was met by Mary Antin and 
Frances Kellor, who knew well from 
actually working with Mr. Hughes, that 
before “hyphenism” became an issue, Mr. 
Hughes, as governor, had made the first 
governmental step toward abolishing the 
hyphen by creating the first state bureau 
for that purpose, the New York State Bu¬ 
reau of Industries and Immigration. 

Mrs. Nelson O’Shaughnessy gave a 
clear presentation of the real Mexican sit¬ 
uation, and Dr. Davis presented the 
facts which, more widely preached and 
more clearly understood, would have set¬ 
tled once and for all the “Kept us out of 
war” hysteria. 

Mrs. Maude Howe Elliott, daughter of 
Julia Ward Howe, explained the vital in¬ 
terests of women in the campaign for real 
preparedness, outlined the collective mes¬ 
sage of the train, and commented upon the 
personal qualities of insight, integrity and 
persistence that fit Mr. Hughes to be a na¬ 
tional administrator. 

Mrs. Edith Ellicott Smith showed that 
the Administration’s boast of unusual bene¬ 
fits to the farmer rested on claims belong¬ 
ing more truly to the Rural Commission 
appointed by President Roosevelt. She 
dealt also with other agricultural questions. 

Mrs. Frank Mebane, of North Carolina, 
analyzed the sectionalism inherent in 
Democratic administration; Miss Eliza¬ 
beth Freeman addressed colored audiences 
at specially arranged meetings. Mrs. Wil¬ 
liam Curtis Demorest presented at most of 
the meetings the most practical methods by 
which women could organize and assist in 
the present campaign. In a number of 
cases practical organization was begun be¬ 
fore the train left the town. 

Other speakers dealt with other issues 
of varying importance, but among them all 
there was no divergence from the task of 
getting Mr. Hughes’s record to the people 
and interpreting him to the voters. 

Under these conditions many ask: “Why 
did the train not carry the women voters 
for Hughes?” 

Could a train spending one day or two 
in a state, and unsupported by either na¬ 


tional or local Republican leaders compete 
with house to house Democratic canvassers, 
book agents and “corsetierres” ? Could a 
train which answered vital questions for a 
few hundred thousand people carry several 
million voters who were being seen person¬ 
ally day by day? Could a train met at 
every point with effective bitterness and 
misrepresentation, and with no refutation 
from its own headquarters, do its task 
effectively ? 

From the moment of its announcement, 
the Democrats planned the defeat of the 
train. They realized its appeal, its power, 
and its possibilities, as the Republicans did 
not. That it was deemed worthy of highly 
organized and systematic attacks is the best 
evidence of its possibilities. The boast of 
the Democrats was that it would “never re¬ 
turn to New York,” and that they “would 
change its itinerary.” In the first they 
failed; in the second, they succeeded to the 
degree of changing the schedule in four 
states. They raised class, racial, sectional 
and personal issues. No money was spared 
in organizing a campaign ahead of the 
train. They stimulated the fear of the 
German vote in one place, the wet and dry 
issue in another, suffrage here and anti¬ 
suffrage there, and sectional jealousy and 
class hatred almost everywhere. 

In the face of a really magnificent or¬ 
ganized opposition from the Democrats, 
and no counter defense from the Republi¬ 
cans, the train proved to be a vote getter. 
Voters in such states as Kansas and Cali¬ 
fornia insist that if it had come earlier and 
stayed longer, it would have carried the 
states for Hughes. It was not that there 
was too much of the train, but that there 
was too little! 

The train encountered six great sources 
of opposition. 

The first obstruction was an American 
press which instructed its Correspondents to 
deal with the train as “society copy.” It 
revealed the fact that the American press 
does not yet regard women as a real factor 
in its national political life. The train did 
much to change this attitude, for at the end 
of the trip the press was reporting the 
meetings from a political point of view. It 
is a significant fact that the actual report¬ 
ing of the meetings in the local press forms, 
generally speaking, a just and fair account 


16 


of the train, and is in striking contrast to 
the stimulated publicity in New York, in 
towns not visited, and in the more unscrup¬ 
ulous of the Democratic papers, which gar¬ 
bled even the news of the day. 

The second great obstacle was the in¬ 
difference of the Republican organization 
to its women voters. Everywhere the train 
went in suffrage states it found an almost 
total lack of interest, of organization, and 
of healthy political life and interest among 
women voters. It was impossible for the 
train to do more than awaken the Repub¬ 
licans to the danger by showing the 
Democratic activity among them, of 
which in some cases they had been quite 
unaware. 

The third opposition was the desire of 
Republican leaders to limit the train’s ac¬ 
tivities to suffrage states and their inability 
to grasp the idea that women can do cam¬ 
paign work without arguing for or against 
suffrage as a sole issue—that women have 
contributions of personality, facts, achieve¬ 
ment, understanding of issues, and a citi¬ 
zenship not to be bounded by a struggle for 
the vote on north, south, east and west. 
Women are supposed to have inalienable 
tendencies like prohibition and suffrage 
which they cannot keep out of politics, an 
error which the train refuted. All the non¬ 
suffrage states out of which the train was 
asked to keep for such reasons went Demo¬ 
cratic. The best argument for suffrage in 
this country is eventually going to be wo¬ 
men’s ability to handle her political duties 
as impersonally, and efficiently, and eco¬ 
nomically as she now does her home or her 
job. 

The fourth big source of opposition was 
the able organization which the Demo¬ 
cratic party put behind its women leaders, 
who pursued a highly personal, bitter cam¬ 
paign of insult and misrepresentation. In 
one place the train was met with advertis¬ 
ing of the “billionaire train,” so libelous 
and gross that it was recalled as soon as 
discovered; in another there was an at¬ 
tempt to drive Democratic motors through 
the reception parade. In another town the 
train was threatened with red paint and 
barbed wire. Districts were organized 
ahead of the train and paid hecklers were 
common. This opposition was to be ex¬ 
pected, and had it been promptly met by 


support of the train from the Republican 
organization throughout the country, it 
would have been the greatest single asset in 
the national campaign, because every wo¬ 
man on the train had a record of achieve¬ 
ment which no campaign hecklers could 
vilify; and every woman had the kind of 
information and the kind of appeal that 
meant votes for Mr. Hughes. 

The fifth big obstacle was the silent op¬ 
position of suffragists who can see only one 
way of winning the vote, by “non-partisan¬ 
ship” and the vociferous denunciation of 
the anti-suffragists, who see in all political 
activity a mania for getting votes for wo¬ 
men. 

The sixth source of opposition lay in 
fear on the part of club women, particu¬ 
larly leaders who put club above country 
and club methods ahead of party and who 
consider civic work as of a higher order 
than political work. These feared to give 
co-operation to any candidate, even a na¬ 
tional candidate. 

In the face of this notable opposition the 
train accomplished, aside from its imme¬ 
diate vote-getting errand, some notable 
things for the national political life of 
women. 

It opened a political door to women’s in¬ 
dependence, self-respect and resourceful¬ 
ness. Nearly every one of the 328 meet¬ 
ings was organized, financed and managed 
by women. 

The train minimized sectional lines and 
laid the basis for a conscious national spirit 
among women; it gathered women’s com¬ 
mittees up at certain towns and carried 
them to others; it took state committees 
and workers from one state to another. 
The chief topic of conversation on these 
rides from city to city was national issues 
and American conditions. Time after time 
the visiting committees emphasized the im¬ 
portance of the stimulus it was to them to 
come thus, often for the first time, into con¬ 
tact with the exponents of national inter¬ 
ests and national issues. “I am going back 
to work with a new sense of national ser¬ 
vice,” was the gist of many a parting 
speech. 

r It disregarded class, racial and religious 
lines. The greatest charge against the 
Democratic campaign is that it sought in 
every way to array class against class— 


17 


Wall Street against the working man, Jew 
against Catholic, the German against the 
English, the rich against the poor. We 
shall be long in recovering from this ar¬ 
rangement. Jews, Catholics, Protestants, 
Poles, Germans, Irish and English, rich 
and poor were among the speakers, audi¬ 
ences and guests of the train. In town 
after town, they said that for the first time 
in its history, everybody was there—the 
club woman, the housewife, the society 
leader, the worker, the suffragist, and the 
anti-everything, and even people, who be¬ 
cause of personal differences hadn’t spoken 
for years, were all working together for a 
good meeting. Even the women voters 
who regarded the train at first as a pre¬ 
sumption on the part of the non-voters 
came to see that a non-voter may love her 
country quite as much and be willing to 
work quite as hard without the vote as 
with it, and may be the same kind of citi¬ 
zen. The train did much to abolish the 
“special privilege” feeling which many vot¬ 
ing women have toward their non-voting 
sisters. 


The train meant for many women a real 
—and a first—opportunity for national 
service. It is a curious commentary upon 
our political life that in the non-suffrage 
states there is no political organization 
through which a woman can serve her 
country or through which she can seek to 
obtain the civic improvement she wants, ex¬ 
cept a suffrage or anti-suffrage party. 
Many thousands of women are of little 
service now because they do not regard 
getting or opposing suffrage as the chief 
end of existence, and as yet have no other 
entry into political activity. 

The train gave the men of many a com¬ 
munity a new insight into women’s powers 
of organization, resourcefulness, and ability 
to do team work. It uncovered the Demo¬ 
cratic opposition and activity which many 
of them had not even suspected. It put 
ginger and interest into a lifeless campaign. 
It cracked the surface of the selfish, mate¬ 
rial, wholly complacent issues of the cam¬ 
paign and restored to some the faith and 
courage that put national honor above 
prosperity. 


Organization and Management 


Every town at which the train stopped 
was organized in advance—first by a field 
worker who assisted in organizing the local 
committee and in planning its demonstra¬ 
tion ; secondly, by a publicity organizer 
who furnished the necessary data and stor¬ 
ies; and thirdly, by an advance train repre¬ 
sentative who said the last word on speak¬ 
ers, programs and other details. Only wo¬ 
men were asked to arrange for the local 
meetings, although the meetings were for 
both men and women, and men usually 
presided or spoke. 

Field organizers were provided from 
headquarters with names and data for 
each town along the route, and with gen¬ 
eral instructions for organizing local train 
committees. Headquarters also kept in 
touch with local political leaders and local 
committees during the month preceding the 
departure of the train from New York. 

There has been a good deal said about 
the luxury of the train and its expense. The 
train was made up of a baggage car, filled 
with literature, a day coach used for a 
workshop, a diner and three compartment 


cars of the ordinary type used on all rail¬ 
ways. One of these was given over to the 
press so the party occupied two compart¬ 
ment cars. Each speaker had a compart¬ 
ment except when they were shared with 
visiting delegations, a frequent occurrence. 
At no time was there a private car attached 
to the train. Each car had its usual por¬ 
ter and there was one maid for the entire 
train. 

All questions of policy, discussion of 
speeches, etc., were decided at daily staff 
meetings and it was understood and gen¬ 
erally observed that criticisms, complaints, 
suggestions, should be made there and 
openly debated, or not made at all. This 
preserved an admirable esprit de corps, and 
brought results far beyond our best hopes. 

The total mileage covered by the train 
was 11,075 miles. The minimum fares re¬ 
quired east of Chicago were 100, and west 
were 75. The total cost of operating the 
train was less than four cents a mile on the 
basis of 100 fares. This included not only 
the actual running of the train, but all of 
the charges for organization ahead of the 


18 


train and the overhead charges for man¬ 
agement at headquarters and on board, as 
well as for the literature and decorations. 
We carried nearly a million pieces of lit¬ 
erature, about three-fourths being supplied 
by the Republican National Committee. 

A train manager had charge of all sched¬ 
ules and train facilities. The New York 
Central sent with the train a special agent 
to whose courtesy and efficiency we owed 
much. In arranging the itinerary, the 
larger cities were selected for the evening 
meetings and as many intervening cities 
and towns as possible were scheduled for 
day meetings. Except for five night stops 
at hotels, the train was kept traveling at 
night. The best and fastest available lines 
were chosen except in one or two instances 
where a second class line was chosen to 
eliminate the payment of extra fares. In 
two or three side trips, where it was neces¬ 
sary to divide the party, regular trains 
were used or one of our cars was attached 
to a regular train. A number of ten- 
minute stops for rear-platform speeches 
were worked in en route in response to in¬ 
sistent requests. The train equipment 
proved to be adequate except in three or 
four instances when an extra Pullman was 
chartered for a night at a time, to accom¬ 
modate especially large delegations. 

The train was late but twice during the 
entire trip, and had to be carefully 
watched to see that it did not get in ahead 
of time. 

Not a single piece of baggage was lost 
at any point. Baggage was transferred 
without the personal attention of any of 
the speakers or passengers. Since the make¬ 


up of the party changed considerably, and 
there were constantly local guests on board 
for a few days at a time, and since the 
speakers had often to be divided—some go¬ 
ing to one town and some to another, the 
baggage arrangements were not always 
simple. About once a week the itinerary 
permitted the train party to stay at a hotel 
over night. 

A force of stenographers was carried and 
train bulletins giving the schedule of the 
next day’s meetings were issued to the 
train members daily. A register was kept 
of all train visitors and guests. 

Immediately upon arrival in a town the 
waiting automobiles were decorated, espe¬ 
cially those to be used for street meetings. 
Special cars were filled with literature. In 
selecting the kind and quantity of literature 
to be distributed at the meetings, local con¬ 
ditions and the kind of meeting arranged 
were always taken into consideration. 
Agricultural articles were distributed in 
farming districts. Col. Roosevelt’s articles 
in strongly Progressive districts, Hughes’s 
labor record in industrial centers, “He 
kept us out of war” facts at all places, 
etc. Nearly 50,000 Hughes Alliance but¬ 
tons were given out during parades, at 
meeting places and from rear platforms. 

The train carried a research assistant 
who supplied each member with daily pa¬ 
pers with up to date political news, and 
with clippings and who gathered informa¬ 
tion for speeches and refutation of mis¬ 
statements. The last word on the Adam¬ 
son Bill or on Mexico, and copies of 
speeches by the leading campaigners, etc., 
were furnished each member regularly. 


Publicity 


The publicity division included the man¬ 
agement of meetings, arrangements with 
local committees, programs, speakers and 
press bureau. 

General Meetings.—Five hundred thou¬ 
sand people were reached directly. Three 
hundred and twenty-eight regular meetings 
were held, in addition to smaller im¬ 
promptu meetings. These meetings had 
one great object—to get votes. And we 
had one great object in every town—to 
reach as many people as possible. Since we 
could not hold night meetings in every 


town, we had to arrange to get the people 
where they were —in factory, shop, railroad 
yard, school, or church. We tried to avoid 
having simply Hughes parties, and we suc¬ 
ceeded. We tried to avoid luncheons and 
receptions in hotel parlors or exclusive 
clubs, except where these were unimpor¬ 
tant features in a day’s program including 
many general meetings. 

The publicity department sent ahead to 
every program chairman these definite re¬ 
quests: to make the main meeting a real 
“mass meeting,” and to so advertise it; to 


19 


hold it not in a hotel ball room or exclusive 
hall, but in some general meeting place; to 
arrange as many industrial meetings as pos¬ 
sible, in the factories if we were there in 
the day time, or in labor halls or sections 
of the city if we were there at night; to 
arrange to have one of our speakers address 
an audience of colored voters; to get per¬ 
mits for street meetings, if permits were 
needed; to have a band. All final ar¬ 
rangements for meetings were made by 
telegraph before the arrival of the train. 
The publicity department wired the local 
committees the list of persons on board, in¬ 
cluding visiting delegations from within 
the state. Very often the local chairman 
for a given town would come to meet the 
train 100 miles or so ahead of its arrival 
in her city in order to perfect the program. 
It must be remembered that some of the 
stops were very short and that six or seven 
meetings were often held in periods vary¬ 
ing from less than an hour to several hours. 

In every case the publicity secretary got 
in touch with the local chairman at the 
very first possible moment on the station 
platform. She had with her a tentative 
program suggested in a staff meeting, and 
then with the local committee she made 
whatever adjustments seemed advisable. 
The automobile processions were arranged, 
the people put into the right automobiles, 
the pictures of local celebrities taken at the 
train. All this had often to be done with 
the greatest celerity, or some of the time 
set aside for the meeting would be sacri¬ 
ficed. Much has been said of the “social 
receptions” accorded the train. As a mat¬ 
ter of fact it was a very business-like per¬ 
formance. A good meeting had to be de¬ 
livered to a waiting crowd, and local com¬ 
mittee and train party alike were intent on 
their common object. 

We tried to turn every circumstance to 
our account. One of the first questions we 
asked on arrival was what else was going 
on in town that night. At Billings, Mon¬ 
tana, for instance, we found the committee 
a little apprehensive about our mass meet¬ 
ing because David Starr Jordan, who had a 
big following there, was lecturing that 
night under the auspices of a distinguished 
club, and in one of the other big halls a 
wrestling match was on. As a matter of 
fact our mass meeting was overcrowded. 


Also, we caught the Jordan peace crowd in 
a big street meeting just as his audience was 
dismissed, and one of our speakers spoke at 
the wrestling match. We “covered” the 
town. 

There were a few poorly attended mass 
meetings. There were a few “frosts.” But 
they were comparatively very few Meed, 
Because the actual report of the meetings 
was not carried fully or without bias 
in any but the local press, the truth about 
these meetings may never be widely known, 
but not only those on the train, but also the 
people of the various cities know well that 
these were in the great majority over¬ 
crowded meetings, business like in tone, 
serious, concentrated, of deep political sig¬ 
nificance. Often a state or county Repub¬ 
lican Chairman would say, “That is the 
best political meeting I have seen. I didn’t 
know women could do it.” 

Significance was not merely in the huge 
meetings of the trip—the spirited crowded 
Seattle meeting at which Senator Beve¬ 
ridge, rising in his box, paid his ardent 
respects to the train as the happy aug¬ 
ury of a new and more healthful era 
in American politics, or the meeting 
in Helena, in which, at the request 
of the state Republican organization, 
Mrs. Robins joined with the Vice- 
Presidential candidate; or the great mid¬ 
morning meeting at Topeka, or the meet¬ 
ing of 6,000 in Des Moines, or that of 
4,000 at Long Beach, but in the quietly 
effective meetings held day after day—now 
in a small town with 500 in some Elks Hall 
or “Goodwill Temple,” more often with 
3,500 in the largest theatre the city could 
boast. At San Diego a crowd of 5,000 
people assembled in front of the great or¬ 
gan on the exposition ground at 9 o’clock 
in the morning; at Springfield, Ill., an at¬ 
tentive crowd of several thousand listened 
to the arguments of our speakers outside 
the Court House, from 8:30 until 11 at 
night. And it was we who broke away 
then, not our audience. Around Los An¬ 
geles, where several of our speakers re¬ 
mained two days while the rest of the party 
went to Phoenix we campaigned in all 
kinds of meetings—in factories, railroad 
yards, woman’s clubs, banquet halls, mass 
meetings, reaching in all 50,000 people in 
that region. The meetings were held at 


20 


sunrise, at high noon in the factories, at 
night in crowded halls. Sometimes during 
a half day’s stop in a given place meetings 
were held in as many as eight outlying 
towns. This often involved long auto or 
tedious street car trips; it always required 
great expedition. In one day eighteen such 
meetings were held. This is not spell¬ 
binding. It is business. The Los Angeles 
section gave Mr. Hughes a majority. 

Industrial Meetings.—Employers, 
whether “Hughes men” or not, showed a 
general willingness to have us address their 
employes. The members of the local com¬ 
mittees whom we had asked to arrange fac¬ 
tory meetings often confessed to us that 
they had never realized before how large a 
part of their resident population, and of 
their intelligent public sentiment, has to be 
reached while at work, if it is going to be 
effectively reached at all. The factory and 
shop meetings were held sometimes at the 
noon hour, sometimes in a recess called in 
the middle of the morning with the ma¬ 
chinery still going, sometimes in the fac¬ 
tory yards when the evening whistles were 
blowing and the crowds pouring home¬ 
ward. The talks at these factory meetings 
had always to be concise. They included 
an analysis of the Adamson Bill, a review 
of the Danbury Hatters’ Case, and a pre¬ 
sentation of Mr. Hughes’s public record, 
his labor record, and his Supreme Court 
decisions. Some of these meetings were 
very impressive. In Miles City, while gen¬ 
eral meetings were being held in the heart 
of the town, Mrs. Raymond Robins spoke 
from 10:10 to 10:30 in the Milwaukee 
Railroad yards. A platform had been care¬ 
fully covered with clean paper for the occa¬ 
sion, and an attentive crowd of men grouped 
around the noisy machinery listened with 
interest to probably the first real statement 
of the labor issues of the campaign which 
they had ever heard. In several cities the 
labor unions arranged for meetings at 
night; and in one place at least, Streator, 
Ill., at the Barr Clay Factory, the secretary 
of the local union, with the co-operation 
of the management, arranged a noon-day 
meeting for 350 men and our speaker was 
told by the management that she should 
take as much time as she needed, and that 
the whistles would not be blown until she 
had finished. 


Colored Meetings.—^We noticed that 
colored audiences showed a serious interest 
in political questions, which this country 
would do well to preserve among them. 
The colored population always co-operated 
in efforts to organize meetings among them. 
Sometimes they preferred to be a part of 
the main mass-meeting, and in all such 
cases the decision was left to them. In one 
city where the colored people were having 
a huge meeting of 15,000 people, our 
speaker was cordially received on the pro¬ 
gram. A number of the colored meetings 
were held in churches. And one got a 
curious feeling that those of the colored 
people who have interested themselves in 
politics at all, see it as something very 
directly connected with civic ideals and per¬ 
sonal standards. In one sense this may be 
only an expression of that naive religionism 
characteristic of the history of the colored 
race in America; in another sense it has 
great promise for their development as a 
contributing element in our best citizen¬ 
ship. 

Street Meetings.—To many towns in 
this country street meetings still mean hood- 
lumism. In arranging them, the publicity 
management continually met the warning, 
“Remember, this is a very conservative 
town.” Wherever we could, without an¬ 
tagonism, we smilingly over-rode the 
counsel of our local committees. And often 
those who set out to street meetings with 
us with the most evident apprehension, 
glowed with pride after the successful busi¬ 
ness-like meeting in the heart of their town, 
under the historic monument, or on the 
steps of the Federal Building, or on the 
“National Bank corner.” After one ex¬ 
periment, talking politics in the open air 
to your passing fellow citizens did not seem 
like such a radical innovation after all. We 
held anywhere from one to ten street meet¬ 
ings in a given town, depending on the 
crowds on the streets and the time of day. 
These were usually held while the main 
mass meeting was going on inside. Some¬ 
times we “captured” other audiences, in or 
outside theatres at the close of a matinee, at 
fair grounds, corn shows, etc. In depart¬ 
ing for street meetings we took with us the 
band that had met us at the station, or, 
failing that, a bugler. An auto loaded 
with literature accompanied every street 


21 


meeting contingent. Usually one of the 
men who was co-operating with the local 
train committee, went with us to introduce 
the speakers. Most often this was the 
mayor of the city or the Republican chair¬ 
man. Usually a crowd was on hand a very 
few minutes after our decorated automobile 
had drawn up at the curb. If it was not, 
and if the town was a sleepy one, several 
of us circled the main street making our 
own announcement of the meeting. 

In all political work during the past few 
years, too little account has been taken of 
the valid use of physical demonstration. 
There was something perfectly sound in 
the old torch light processions and red fire 
parades. Of course there is no political 
argument in these things. But they are a 
very valuable adjunct to sound meetings. 
When people have forgotten how to march 
and sing together, and prefer to keep their 
campaign clear of such “low brow tricks,” 
they have forgotten that enthusiasm and 
mob psychology are as old as the human 
race and can never be ruled out of any 
game in which all of us take a part. Many 
a Republican organization man said to us, 
“You have set the ball rolling. You have 
put the ‘pep’ into the campaign for this 
town. Now it won’t be so hard for us to 
keep them waked up.” 

This organized plan of meeting voters 
where they were, in shops, factories, col¬ 
ored meetings, on the street, had two ef¬ 
fects ; it got more votes; and it had a 
healthy influence on the political solidarity 
of the town, and the social sympathies of 
its residents. 

Speakers and Programs.—^We had a 
two-fold problem in arranging our pro¬ 
grams: to make sure that they included the 
speakers and subjects calculated to give our 
whole composite message; and to meet the 
particular desires of the local committee, as 
to speakers. In a given hour and a half, or 
two hours, we should often have preferred 
to have two long speeches, allowing time 
for full exposition and argument. But the 
desire of the local committee to hear this 
or that speaker whose work they knew and 
whose approach to political interest they 
understood, could not be easily disregarded. 
We presented our judgment to them and 
then left to them the final decision. Wc 
had few general speakers. Almost every 


one had studied carefully some given issue 
of the campaign and had a background of 
work that particularly fitted her to deal 
with it. But in the course of the trip we 
several times found that subjects of current 
importance in the campaign discussions 
were not being intensively covered by any 
one of our speakers. This fact would be 
brought out at staff meeting, and some one 
of the group would volunteer to make the 
necessary study and get up the speech. 
When it is considered that there were at 
best only a few hours on the train in any 
day, it is readily seen what concentrated 
effort this service required. Every speaker 
made an evident effort to sense the value of 
a meeting as a w’hole. If her subject 
seemed less necessary in a given place, she 
was usually the first to call this to the at¬ 
tention of the program maker. The speak¬ 
ers were good soldiers. It was sometimes 
impossible to let them know w’hether or not 
they were to speak until they had arrived 
at the place of meeting. It was repeatedly 
necessary to leave out scheduled speakers, 
to shorten their time (because of change of 
plans made by the local committees) after 
their speech had been planned, and to ask 
speakers to take part in important street or 
overflow meetings when they had already 
spoken as often during the day as was rea¬ 
sonable or good for their throats. Speakers 
were always given the exact number of 
minutes they were to speak and time was 
called if they exceeded their limit. But 
they adapted themselves to these given 
periods with wonderful flexibility and 
often a meeting in which eight people 
spoke and which had to be closed promptly 
in order to reach the train on time was car¬ 
ried through without the calling of time on 
any speaker. As soon as the “train crew”^ 
realized that it would be quite impossible 
to make programs final until we had act¬ 
ually arrived in a city, they all voted to be 
ready at any time, to speak for any given 
length of time whether it was five minutes 
or thirty, and indoors or outdoors. 

Press.—The advance publicity for the 
train was managed in two ways: through 
the New York office in co-operation with 
local committees and field organizers; and 
through an advance publicity agent who 
went over the route to the Pacific Coast 
and back during September. The advance 


22 


agent saw the editors of the daily papers 
in every town, and wherever possible the 
political reporters. She saw the As¬ 
sociated Press men and gave special ad¬ 
vance stories to editors. She also attended 
local committee meetings, gave advice as to 
the form of entertainment when asked, told 
each group what the women of the other 
cities had planned, and saw the leading Re¬ 
publican organization men in every town. 
She notified the press bureau in New York 
concerning the special interests of the re¬ 
spective papers, and the kind of stories and 
photographs most desired. The advance 
publicity agent returned to New York to 
accompany the train. From time to time 
en route she was sent ahead again, rejoin¬ 
ing the train at intervals. 

Publicity from the New York Office. 
—A daily and sometimes a semi-daily news 
service for the train was conducted by the 
Publicity Department of the Women’s 
Committee in the New York office, from 
September 12 until November 3, These 
news releases, before the train started, were 
based on the reports of the field organizers 
and the advance agents, and gave the plans 
of the various cities organizing train com¬ 
mittees, etc, etc. After the train started 
the daily news releases were based upon the 
telegraphic report sent back from the train 
to the Publicity Department every night. 
These stories were released to New York 
City papers always, and, in addition, to 
differing groups of papers according to the 
kind of story and its probable interest in 
different geographical sections. 

In cases where the local train commit¬ 
tees was well organized before the train 
started, these committees were used by the 
New York Office to promote local publi¬ 
city. Special stories were sent to people 
designated by the local committee or sent 
to the local committee for redistribution to 
the local papers. Sometimes the local com¬ 
mittees had a publicity committee who took 
the matter directly in charge. In some 
cases we simply got in touch with our local 
organizers, asked them to find people on 
their local papers who would be interested 
in their news or feature stories, and upon 
securing the names of the editors and the 
agreement to use material, we sent stories, 
mats and photos directly to them. 

Special news stories were issued with 


several numbers of the Hughes Campaign 
Service, to its list of 50,000 official cam¬ 
paign workers. These stories included 
Chairman Wilcox’s endorsement, a state¬ 
ment of the purpose of the train by the 
Chairman of the Women’s Committee, and 
interviews with Mrs. Raymond Robins, 
Dr. Katherine Davis and others of the 
train party. 

Mats and photographs of the train party, 
individual speakers, and members of the 
train committee were sent out as advance 
publicity from the New York Office as 
well as from the train later. Proofs of the 
train poster, as well as the poster in mat 
form, were also widely distributed to the 
press with the itinerary. 

One of the important pieces of publicity 
from the New York Office after the train 
started was a telegram sent one day in ad¬ 
vance to all the papers in a given town, an¬ 
nouncing the exact time of the arrival and 
departure of the train the next day and in¬ 
viting the paper to send its representative. 
In many cases the reporters appeared at the 
train with the telegrams in their hands as 
their credentials. 

Posters and Advertising. —Fifty thou¬ 
sand train posters were distributed and 
used extensively by local committees. No 
advertising of the train was done from 
headquarters, but local committees were 
advised as to the best method of advertising 
the mass meetings in the daily press and by 
other methods. 

Publicity from the Train.—After the 
train started most of the press work was 
done from the train—in addition, of 
course, to the daily news service from the 
New York Office based on daily telegrams 
from the train. The press bureau on the 
train had stenographers and a mimeograph 
machine to get out its routine publicity. 
This consisted of (1) telegraphic dispatch 
nightly to the New York Office, and some¬ 
times to Chicago and San Francisco papers 
and the Associated Press; (2) a telegraphic 
report of the day’s meetings sent nightly to 
the three towns directly ahead; (3) a con¬ 
densed running story of the progress of the 
train current to the minute, ready to be is¬ 
sued to the reporters as soon as the train 
stopped; (4) advance copies of the speeches 
to be given; (5) a correct list of all on 


23 


board and short biographies of each 
speaker; (6) special daily stories to two 
New York and one Chicago paper which 
did not have correspondents on board. Five 
New York papers and two Chicago papers 
had correspondents, and the papers of many 
other cities had correspondents aboard 
throughout their state, or for a part of the 
trip. 

Every paper in the towns ahead received 
by mail three relays of advance publicity 
material, accompanied by photographs and 
mats. But the press representative always 
carried with her to the meetings the latest 
material, and copies of all other available 
matter, recent statements, interesting tele¬ 
grams, etc., in order that if there had been 
any hitch all material might still be avail¬ 
able in the most convenient form. It does 
not need to be said that in addition to this 
material much interest was aroused by talk¬ 


ing to the reporters. We recall some nota¬ 
ble instances of Democratic editors and re¬ 
porters who came to the meetings in a 
somewhat cynical temper and who showed 
and expressed profound respect at its close. 

In addition to the special news service 
from the train to the towns on the itinerary 
a number of general releases were sent out 
from the train to several hundred papers 
at a time. The material thus released in¬ 
cluded special interviews from members of 
the train party, endorsements by Republi¬ 
can leaders, and extracts from speeches. 

The official photographer for the trip 
took many photographs in every town. 
These were cleared to the press through 
the regular photographic news agency, and 
also by the. Publicity Department from 
New York and from the train. Moving 
picture firms arranged to have their men 
meet the train at intervals. 


24 


For Future Reference 


The Women’s Committee is recording 
here conclusions based on its experience in 
this campaign. These conclusions are 
stated with care, and are the result not of 
theories, but of experience. They are given 
for whatever suggestion they may have for 
men and women alike in future campaigns. 

We believe that a new order of political 
campaign is indicated in this country, and 
is coming to pass. It will be new in spirit, 
and new in technique. It will be less “pro¬ 
fessional” in a political sense, yet much bet¬ 
ter organized. It will engage the active in¬ 
terests of many more groups of our popula¬ 
tion than are now affected by political in¬ 
terest or organization. It must and will be 
the culmination of public interest and opin¬ 
ion on public questions in inter-campaign 
periods. It will bridge the vast gap that 
now exists in this country between “poli¬ 
tics” and civic enthusiasm and civic zeal 
and civic work. 

Any criticism implied in these sugges¬ 
tions is criticism of the political attitude of 
the American people, rather than of the 
particular management of this particular 
campaign. We are pointing no morals, 
and have no interest whatever, in “fixing 
the blame.” We are interested in setting 
forth the bases upon which we believe must 
rest the reconstruction of American politics 
in general, and of American political cam¬ 
paigns in particular. As a result of our 
own efforts in this campaign and our ob¬ 
servation of the efforts of others, our con¬ 
clusions urgently point to: 

1. The need of education on na¬ 
tional issues among voters everywhere. 
The same voters that reasoned carefully 
on local issues and got and weighed the 
facts on these decided national issues and 
tickets by prejudice, convention, or mob 
psychology. Millions of voters lost sight 
of the fact that there were any national 
issues. They voted for or against two 
men, on general impressions gained less 
from the records of the candidates than 
from hearsay. 


2. The need of an awakened na¬ 
tional feeling. Education on na¬ 
tional issues will be of little use unless 
there is devotion to national welfare. 
The deepest lesson of the past campaign 
is our need of a nationalized citizenship. 

3. The need of taking women into 
account in all political reckonings and all 
political work. This includes considera¬ 
tion of women not only as voters and a 
now considerable part of the electorate, 
but also as citizens without the vote, 
capable of influencing public tendencies 
and of making important contributions 
of citizenship and service to the cam¬ 
paign. We want no sex solidarity in 
politics. We do want women di¬ 
rectly represented in the political or¬ 
ganization, with a direct voice in party 
councils. They have demonstrated their 
ability to hold up their end. 

4. The need of a new spirit in party 
organization. We need strong party or¬ 
ganization. But it is becoming more 
and more clear that real party organiza¬ 
tion must be based on live principles, not 
on traditions merely. One of the as¬ 
pects most generally remarked in this 
election is the tendency in the west and 
among women to vote for persons 
rather than parties, especially on the na¬ 
tional ticket. This tendency contains 
both danger and promise. It contains 
danger in the degree to which it indi¬ 
cates the possibility of a gradual loss of 
the sound national principles upon which 
valid political parties are founded. Per¬ 
sonality and leadership are shifting 
things and can never be made to take the 
place of these. We need parties. And 
it must be repeated that the tendency to 
overlook the party idea and be con¬ 
cerned with personality and candidate 
only is dangerous to the ideal of sound 
political organization. But in the de¬ 
gree to which this tendency makes away 
from hide-bound loyalty to a formal or¬ 
ganization or machine, it is an undis¬ 
guised virtue, and contains great prom- 


25 


ise. It heralds the intention of healthy- 
minded citizens to make parties express 
their principles, or lose support. It is a 
test of life, so to speak, in political or¬ 
ganization, and forms a check upon it. 
If we see truly and plan carefully we can 
make this “non-partisanship” of a large 
percentage of our present voters our 
greatest asset in securing a new spirit in 
party organization. Potentially it is a 
source not of party disaffection, but of 
party control—and regeneration. 

5. The need of a closer connection 
hettveen national headquarters and local 
organizations in any national campaign. 
There must be respect for state and local 
issues, and courage in facing them on the 
part of national headquarters. There 
must be consideration of local needs and 
requests, as to speakers, literature, poli¬ 
cies. There must above all be a regular 
interchange of information. When this 
is assured the enthusiasm of a given city 
or state will not all be thrown into gu¬ 
bernatorial and congressional campaigns. 
The presidential campaign will have its 
true place. 

6. The need that the political organ- 
ization in a given community shall be 
more truly representative of all elements 
in the community. All kinds of people 
must be active in it—or it cannot carry 
throughout the city. If there are many 
political clubs or sub-organizations there 
must be also provision for allying these 
in the campaign and correlating and con¬ 
centrating their work. 

7. The need in a national campaign 
of a well organized method of reaching 
working men. and women, whose work¬ 
ing days leave little time for other in¬ 
terests. The mass meetings must be 
made their meetings. Their speakers 
must appear. We believe a national fac¬ 
tory campaign of noon hour meetings, or 
street meetings outside the gates of the 
works at closing time in the evening, 
with speakers qualified to give the can¬ 
didate’s real record on the issues nearest 
to the people, must be an important part 
of future campaigns. Nowhere in the 
past campaign was bitterness, misrepre¬ 
sentation and illusion more determining 
than among the working men and 
women. 


8. The need of a clear cut financial 
responsibility, and a careful budget sys¬ 
tem with intelligent planning in ad¬ 
vance, and apportionments for various 
divisions of work. For women especially 
we have shown in the body of this re¬ 
port that, in the present state of their 
participation with men in political work, 
financial responsibility on their part must 
go with independence and initiative. 
These will be difficult to secure without 
such responsibility. 

9. The need of securing campaign 
contributions in small sums from rank 
and file voters. This is already a matter 
of public interest. The discussions at¬ 
tending the proposed Corrupt Practices 
Act show how strongly public sentiment 
tends in this direction. 

1C. The need of a new kind of cam¬ 
paign literature —more facts, more argu¬ 
ments, more practical discussion of issues 
in short form, more careful and com¬ 
plete presentation of the record and 
opinions of the candidates, with full con¬ 
text. The day has passed when the re¬ 
printing of long speeches will satisfy 
voters. They want facts, carefully and 
powerfully stated. 

11. The need of a research bureau, 
as carefully equipped with experts as a 
scientific bureau would be, and as indus¬ 
trious, and as truthful, conducted every 
day in the year. 

12. The need of more careful selec¬ 
tion and assignment of speakers. The 
speakers’ force in a national campaign 
must contain fewer congressional and lo¬ 
cal candidates for office, fewer “orators,” 
more real expounders and leaders. They 
must be fully equipped early in the cam¬ 
paign by the research bureau. They 
must be sent out with reference to local 
needs and desires. 

13. The need of more direct mate¬ 
rial for editors and the press from the 
publicity bureau. They need all the 
facts and leads of the campaign, as fast 
as they can be delivered, in the most con¬ 
crete and powerful form. After all the 
main business of a publicity bureau in a 
national campaign is not to furnish es¬ 
says and plate matter to country editors. 

14. The need of a more carefully 
considered foreign language press service. 


26 


Millions of new American citizens are 
most directly reached in this way and 
they deserve the best that can be given 
them. We believe this needs to be done 
in a discriminating way by a staff of peo¬ 
ple in close touch with the different 
races. It must be borne in mind that 
most of the foreign language papers are 
frankly not interested in political mate¬ 
rial on its own merit. They want ad¬ 
vertising and they try always to make a 
deal by which for so much paid matter 
they will publish so much editorial mat¬ 
ter. In our judgment what is needed is 
to make a great deal of use of the few 
larger and more powerful journals 
which do not live from hand to mouth 
and can afford to have some editorial 
policy and some interest in the country 
aside from the money they can get. We 
believe that for immediate and practical 
purposes paid advertising is the most 
successful way of dealing with the other 


papers, until a campaign of education— 
and of extermination—will make some¬ 
thing else possible. 

And finally, none of these things will be 
worth the paper it is written upon unless 
there is political courage. This campaign 
should spell the death of a purely negative 
opposition campaign. Positive national is¬ 
sues courageously championed in every 
state (not loud pedaled in some and soft 
pedaled in others), combined with empha¬ 
sis upon the issues of most interest to that 
community must be the order of the future. 
Until we have the courage to make our na¬ 
tion’s appeal above the appeal to the selfish 
interest of local publics, we shall remain 
politically in the state of chaos, inertia, 
jealous rivalry, inefficiency, indifference 
and stupidity in which we now find our¬ 
selves in the beginning of the year 1917. 
We are marking time while other nations 
make history. 


27 


National Hughes Alliance 

Women’s Committee, 1916 


STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS & DISBURSEMENTS 
GENERAL FUND 


RECEIPTS 

General . $77,038.75 

Straight America (sale and royalty contributed). 1,158.25 

Refunds . 2,961.07 

Women’s N. Y. C. Committee. 2,803.85 

Interest . -81 


DISBURSEMENTS 


$83,963.63 



June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Total 

Administration . 

$170.00 

$1,050.79 

$2,626.06 

$3,411.56 

$1,682.91 

$1,788.18 

$10,729.50 

Field Organization .. 

87.50 

1,206.18 

1,803.17 

4,511.28 

3,965.06 

3,150.56 

14,723.75 

Miscellaneous . 

20.00 

1,300.00 

1,000.00 

200.70 



2,520.70 

Women’s N. Y. C. 








Committee . 



1,384.50 

1,846.00 

4,307.50 

461.50 

7,999.50 

Finance & Membership 

146.67 

1,262.29 

2,451.71 

2,104.35 

1,778.73 

3,348.24 

11,091.99 

Publicity . 








Press . 

219.16 

917.79 

2,373.77 

3,048.27 

5,145.95 

4,242.84 

15,947.78 

Speakers . 



125.25 

252,38 

318.56 


696.19 

Publications . 

• 

148.50 

1,323.82 

3,437.26 

2,639.19 

4,215.58 

11,764.35 

Research . 

45.00 

824.88 

720.68 

844.65 

208.33 

196.67 

2,939.21 


$688.33 

$6,710.43 

$13,817.96 

$19,656.45 

$20,136.23 

$17,403.57 

$78,412.97 


Balance. 5,550.66 


$83,963.63 


Women’s Campaign Train for Hughes, 1916 


STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS & DISBURSE]VIENTS 
RECEIPTS 


Contributions . $43,430.00 

Refunds . 510.98 


Deficit 


$43,940.98 

4,932.34 


DISBURSEMENTS 


$48,873.32 


Accounts 

September 

October 

November 

Total 

Administration Salaries . 

Administration Expense Account . 

Publicity Salaries . 

Publicity Expense Account . 

Transportation . 

$531.24 

51.00 

501.51 

541.06 

25,331.75 

2,608.10 

609.56 

140.00 

$648.65 

1,209.30 

694.26 

1,443.57 

1,595.20 

5,336.47 

318.88 

417.09 

$268.48 

3,350.40 

413.09 

579.02 

53.93 

845.71 

138.55 

1,246.50 

$1,448.37 

4,610.70 

1,608.86 

2,563.65 

26,980.88 

8,790.28 

1,066.99 

1,803.59 

Expenses en route, Oflace Supplies, Decorations.. 
Organization . 

Meetings . 


$30,314.22 

$11,663.42 

$6,895.68 

$48,873.32 


28 






























































I 


Appendices 


Comments on Hughes Campaign Service 


William J. Norton, Secretary of the Hughes 
Alliance of Illinois: “I received yester¬ 
day a copy of the publication of the 
Women's Branch of the Hughes Alli¬ 
ance, and I wish to congratulate you 
upon its very excellent make-up and real 
importance for campaign purposes. I 
have already found it very useful and 
am referring to it constantly in my dic¬ 
tation. I will appreciate it very much 
if you will put me on your mailing list 
for about ten copies of each issue. I 
also have a request from Edward B. 
Clark, political editor of the Chicago 
Evening Post, asking that his name be 
put on your mailing list.” 

Charles M. Harger, of the Abilene (Kansas) 
Reflector: “I’d like 1,000 copies of it 
here to use in the campaign.” 

Mr. William Qrissem, Secretary of the State 
Executive Committee of the Republican 
Party of North Carolina: “While I do 
not wish to appear greedy, I would be 
very glad to mail this first edition of 
your pamphlet to each of our chairmen 
of the one hundred counties if you could 
furnish me such a number.” 

0. J. Mitchell, of Los Angeles, Cal.: “I have 
had the pleasure of seeing your first 
number. It is of so much up-to-date in¬ 
terest about the man who is to be the 
next President, I should like to see also 
all subsequent numbers.” 

E. M. Quimby, Chairman of the Republican 
City Committee of Suffolk, Va.: “I will 
appreciate it very much if you will send 
me 50 copies of the Service.” 

H. O. Wassen, of Pittsburgh, Pa.: “I have 
read with approval and much interest 
the first issue of the HUGHES CAM¬ 
PAIGN SERVICE. It is well considered 
and set forth, and if it persists in man¬ 
ner as it starts out will prove to be a 
splendid campaign text book.” 

Ralph 0. Stauber, Delegate to the Republi¬ 
can National Convention in 1912 and 
1916 and an Attorney at St. Joseph, Mo.: 
“If I send you a list of names of men in 
this city and this, the 4th Congressional 
District of Missouri, to whom in my 
judgment your service would appeal, 
will you furnish them your service? 
Again, I have a special list of St. Joseph 
traveling men with resident addresses. 
Would you furnish them your service?” 


Charles F. Sweet, member of the Republican 
State Committee of Maine: “We have 
in this County approximately 8,000 vot¬ 
ers and during our State campaign I 
should like to cover the entire county 
with one or more of these bulletins, if 
they are obtainable.” 

T. J. Henaker, Deputy Clerk of the Circuit 
Court of Raleigh Co., W. Va.: “If you 
will put my name on your list for a num¬ 
ber of extra copies each week, I will take 
great pleasure in distributing them to 
the best advantage. If you desire, I will 
make a list of 200 or 300 of the most 
prominent Republican workers in my 
county and send them to you.” 

Rev. Alfred W. Tongue, of Preston, la.: “The 
initial number of Hughes Campaign 
Service received. It is an inspiring is¬ 
sue well calculated to win the confidence 
and commendation of all thinking men.” 

Secretary of Hughes Alliance of Illinois: “I 
again wish to thank you for your Cam¬ 
paign Service. We have taken Mr. Col¬ 
by’s article and are having it reprinted 
as one of our Hughes Alliance bulle¬ 
tins.” 

L. L. Rupert, Kansas City, Mo.: “I believe 
you are going to play a very important 
part in convincing the independent voter 
to vote for Mr. Hughes.” 

Frank P. Rotton, Editor of the Essex Inde¬ 
pendent, Essex, la.: “I believe it will 
prove a strong factor in the campaign. 
Many Democrats are saying they will 
not vote for Wilson.” 

Horace M. Bradley, member Florida Con¬ 
gressional Committee, Clay County, Fla.: 
“I wish to congratulate you on the 
choice of contributions used. It is cer¬ 
tain to be of great assistance to the par¬ 
ty workers everywhere and is applicable 
to all sections of the country.” 

The Boston Daily Advertiser : “Through 
some oversight the Advertiser has not 
yet received copies of the third weekly 
bulletin issued by your Committee. I 
trust that you will favor us with copies 
of the Bulletin.” 

Peter H. Miller, candidate for Congress, Flor¬ 
ida: “The voters in my district are 
starving for a little Republican news. 
There is not a Republican newspaper in 
the state. Send us more of the bulle¬ 
tins.” 


29 



Stanley M. Isaacs, 54 William Street, N. Y. 
City: “I have seen copies of the first 
three numbers and will find future num¬ 
bers useful during the campaign.” 

Secretary to Congressman Timherlake of Col¬ 
orado: “In the issue before me I find 
several articles from which I expect to 
take pointers for some publicity work.” 

Senator Lippitt, Rhode Island: “I think 
your Hughes Campaign Service contains 
much that is valuable and interesting.” 

Republican Organization, Bellingham, 
Wash.: “I would like a quantity of the 
Hughes Campaign Service. Received 
several the other day and have not been 
able to keep track of them so great has 
been the demand for them. Especially 
do we need to distribute them among the 
labor class who are led to believe that 
Wilson is the friend and Hughes the en¬ 
emy of labor. This can be overcome, but 
we wish to have printed proof of his 
stand.” 

The Nassau Post, Freeport, L. I.: “The mag¬ 
azine is particularly useful in a news¬ 
paper office and has plenty of punch.” 

Republican Club of Massachusetts: “We 
think this admirable campaign material, 
and we could use, if you nave them to 
spare, as many as five thousand copies 
of each issue.’’ 

W. C. O’Donnell, Jr., of the Educational 
Foundations Magazine: “Would you be 
willing to allow us to publish in Educa¬ 
tional Foundations the article entitled 
‘What is Americanism?’ by David Jayne 
Hill, published in the Hughes Campaign 
Service under date of August 4. This 
favor will be greatly appreciated. Per¬ 
mit me to add that if there is anything 
I can do personally to assist in the cam¬ 
paign for the election of Mr. Hughes I 
am at your service.” 

W. T. Arnold, Chairman, Republican Execu¬ 
tive Committee, Madison County, Tenn.: 
“This is a list of the Republican Execu¬ 
tive Committee, of Madison County, 
Tenn. Please put them on mailing list 
so that they can receive the Hughes 
Campaign Service; it will enable them 
to meet the Democratic arguments. We 
have no Republican paper in West or 
Middle Tennessee.” 

Lafe Young, Jr., Des Moines, la.: “This is 
fine; very well gotten up, indeed. Just 
the sort of stuff we want to run on our 
editorial page. We like things that are 
crisp, timely, to-the-point, and especially 
things that are signed. Signed stuff is 
much more impressive than unsigned. 
Like to have you send two copies, one 
addressed to me personally and the 
other to the managing editor at the edi¬ 
torial department.” 


Marvin A. Riley, Director, N. J. Republican 
State Committee: “We could use even 
more than the number of copies you 
have been sending. We have more than 
200 clubs in the State, every one of 
which is clamoring for it.” 

August Beaver, Editor of ‘'The Wage Earn¬ 
er,” Boston, Mass.: “Please place us on 
your mailing list for 100 or 200 pieces of 
each of your bulletins.” 

T. J. Honaker, Sec’y, Republican Campaign 
Committee, Raleigh County, W. To.: 
“The distribution of the Campaign 
Service is having good effect. Republi¬ 
can candidate for Governor, Ira E. Rob¬ 
inson, received great applause at men¬ 
tion of Hughes’ name when he spoke in 
Beckley last night. Think the service 
was a big factor in this enthusiasm.” 

H. J. Hagerman, Roswell, N. M.: “It is ex¬ 
cellent stuff—fine, and just what I want, 
the best gotten up bulletin I’ve ever 
seen.” 

Alfred Marshall, Philadelphia, Pa.: “The 
articles in the Bulletin are very inter¬ 
esting and valuable.” 

Robert Smith, Omaha, Neb.: “It contains 
just the facts touching this campaign 
that I am anxious to have.” 

George F. Bruongton, Lawyer, Aztec, N. M.: 
“I am very much pleased with the Serv¬ 
ice. Newspapers in this county all Dem¬ 
ocratic, as is the county. Badly in need 
of the Service.” 

L. C. Anderson, Sec’y to Charles B. Warren, 

Detroit, Mich.: “I want the Hughes 
Campaign Service to be sent to Michi¬ 
gan men actively engaged in Hughes 
Campaign. We could use to great ad¬ 
vantage five hundred copies of issue of 
Sept. 6 with article for insurance men.” 

F. B. Campbell, Sec’y, Republican County 
Central Committee, Canon City, Colo.: 
“It seems to me that this is a paper that 
will do considerable good towards the 
election of a Republican president.” 

M. B. Burrow, Chairman, Franklin Co. Re¬ 
publican Central Committee, Altus, Ark.: 
“We have to fight the old time Democ¬ 
racy of 1861-65 in this county. You can 
guess what we have to contend with. 
Please put my name on your mailing 
list.” 

Ward Hunt, Sec’y County Central Commit¬ 
tee, Colville, Wash.: “After having ex¬ 
amined several bulletins of the Hughes 
Campaign Service, I am convinced that 
this Service will be of incalculable ben¬ 
efit to the National Compaign of this 
country, if we can secure a sufficient 
number of the bulletins to circulate 
among our voters.” 

David Jayne Hill, Cohasset, Mass.: “Please 
send me 50 copies of bulletin No. 6.” 


30 


11. Comments on the Women’s Campaign Train for Hughes 


Charles Evans Hughes, Oct. 17, 1916: 

“Please give to the women of the cam¬ 
paign train my heartiest congratulations 
and the assurance of my cordial appre¬ 
ciation of their earnest work.” 

Mrs. Charles Evans Hughes, Niles, Michigan, 
Oct. 17, 1916: “Mr. Hughes and I have 
read them (daily reports) with the deep¬ 
est interest and satisfaction and are 
most appreciative of the splendid work 
which is being done.” 

Colonel Roosevelt, Denver, Colorado, Oct. 24, 
1916: “I want to say a few words about 
this train. It is a little humorous that 
the same people who are saying ‘He 
kept us out of war’ so vigorously are 
going to the verge of private warfare 
in an effort to defeat this train. As to 
the ‘billionaire train,’ I happen to know 
the personnel of the train and know that 
every woman on the train is a wage 
earner, except two that are married. I 
know of no men or women of whom it 
could more accurately be said that they 
represent the idea of sane service, and 
I wish that all our citizens could know 
how much zealous effort has been and can 
be expended with magnificent return in 
a cause without resorting to the expe¬ 
dients of militant suffragettes. With 
all my heart I congratulate you upon 
the work you have done and upon the 
disinterestedness, the courage, and the 
vision with w^hich you have met those 
gross and brutal efforts, w'hich really 
represent the negation of the spirit of 
fair play we like to think of as the guid¬ 
ing spirit of this nation. I am not, as 
you know, used to sharing my time, but 
I have asked to share it tonight with 
two of your number at the meeting at 
the Auditorium.” 

William R. Willcox, Chairman Republican 
National Committee, New York City, 
Sept. 16, 1916: “The best thing about 
it is that it really has for its first object 
getting votes for Mr. Hughes. Women 
throughout the country are interested in 
showing that women’s political activity 
is by no means wholly expressed in the 
cause of suffrage. This train is not a 
suffrage train. It is a practical expres¬ 
sion of women’s political co-operation 
with men for the election of Mr. Hughes, 
in a national crisis. 

“Besides getting votes for Mr. Hughes, 
I think the campaign train will serve a 
large purpose as it goes through the 
twenty-nine states in its itinerary, car¬ 
rying a group of national women work¬ 
ers and speakers. It will unite women 
in national solidarity behind a national 
issue.” 

Senator Albert B. Cummins, Iowa, October 
30, 1916: “It was the universal com¬ 


ment that it was the most satisfactory 
political event which has occurred in 
this city for years.” 

Senator Albert J. Beveridge, Seattle, Wash., 
October 13, 1916: “It has often been 
contended with reference to women’s po¬ 
litical importance that they are not 
equal to men. These women here with 
a magnificent record of accomplishment 
behind them, are sufficient answer to 
that objection. Where in the world can 
you find a more magnificent type of 
womanly power and accomplishment 
than Mary Antin with her mind of 
light and heart of fire? Where can 
you find the equal in magnificence of 
spirit of Mrs. Dorr and Katherine Da¬ 
vis? I challenge anybody to produce 
among men or women a higher type than 
Mrs. Maud Howe Elliott. I count it an 
unusual honor to be in this wonderful 
presence. In all of my experience and 
study of American politics nothing has 
ever impressed me so much as the tour 
these women are making. It marks a 
greater political epoch for America. 
These women are the heralds of a new 
day. We now have the consciousness 
that there is before us a greater nation 
than we have ever had. It will be a 
nobler nation because we shall build 
now not with our men alone but with 
our women, who by their work thus far 
have done so much to fashion this world 
of ours after a nobler fashion.” 

Senator Reed Smoot, Salt Lake City, Utah, 
October 23 1916: “Issues of the cam¬ 
paign were discussed most intelligently 
in Utah by speakers on the Women’s 
Hughes Campaign Train. They were 
listened to with the utmost attention. I 
am convinced that the train has been a 
great success and cannot fail to have 
marked effect upon the election.” 

C. M. Harvey, State Chairman, Helena, Mon¬ 
tana, October 12, 1916: “Meeting splen¬ 
did success; Mrs. Robins’s talk last 
night left very favorable impression and 
extravagantly commented upon. There 
is no question now that the women’s 
train is cutting the widest swath of any 
political scythe.” 

Ex-Governor Marion E. Hay, Spokane, Wash¬ 
ington, October 13, 1916: “The speakers 
of the Women’s Campaign Train for 
Hughes packed the Auditorium to its 
capacity tonight and presented issues of 
the campaign concisely and convinc¬ 
ingly. If proper support is given these 
women, all states visited by them will 
be safely for Hughes.” 

Miss Harriet E. Yittum, Chicago, Illinois'. 
“There is no question that the train has 
done an immense amount of good 
throughout all the western states and 


31 


has made many votes for Mr. Hughes 
and the Republican ticket. The point 
that specially impressed me Saturday 
night at Springfield, and which, I be¬ 
lieve, has impressed everyone wherever 
the train has gone, is that all the women 
on the train, having been engaged in 
civic and social work, have taken this 
campaign out of the old time politics 
and have made it accord with Webster’s 
definition of politics—‘the science of 
government.’ ” 

County Chairman Charles Hehhard, Spokane, 
Washington, October 13,1916: “Meeting 
tonight far beyond expectations. It is 
the most effective campaign work we 
have had. Every speech had punch and 
sincerity and the women carried convic¬ 
tion as no ordinary campaign speech 
could. Only regret is that we did not 
fully appreciate value in advance and 
make larger use of party’s time.’’ 

Senator Theodore Burton, Ohio, September 
25, 1916: “Women are no longer re¬ 
maining in the background of practical 
thought and action but are asserting 
their influence vigorously and especially 
in regard to the election of Mr. Hughes. 
The most striking feature of their work 
is the announcement that a Women’s 
Special Train will tour the country dur¬ 
ing the month of October from coast to 
coast, paying visits to over one hundred 
cities and carrying the message of the 
necessity for a Republican victory this 
fall. This transcontinental train with 
the leading representative women of the 
country must surely arouse all factions 
in the electorate of the coming position 
of women in shaping the country’s fu¬ 
ture political history.” 

William Lemcke, State Chairman of North 
Dakota: “Your train has had the best 
effect of any work that has been done 
in North Dakota this year. Any state¬ 
ment to the contrary is without founda¬ 
tion and on a level with the misrepre¬ 
sentations during the present campaign. 
I am satisfied, however, that misrepre¬ 
sentations of this kind will not win the 
campaign because they are an insult to 
the intelligence of the people.” 

Clarence Phelps Dodge, President Hughes Al¬ 
liance, Colorado Springs, October 30, 
1916: “Your day in Colorado Springs 
of inestimable value to Hughes. Strong, 
positive evidence that many votes were 
made and changed for Hughes. Also 
deep impression made on all citizens of 
this city by character and achievement 
and personality of each member of the 
party of Hughes Special. You also 
stirred up great enthusiasm in Den¬ 
ver.” 

Reed Smoot, Glen Miller, Chairman Repub¬ 
lican State Committee, C. P. Overfield, 
President Hughes Alliance, Salt Lake 
City, October 24, 1916: “The Republi¬ 
can State Committee and the Utah 


Hughes Alliance extend you greetings 
and wish to thank the members of your 
party and you for the time you so gra¬ 
ciously gave us during the past week in 
sympathetic support of our national 
ticket and the attendant beneficial inter¬ 
ests of the entire American people 
through your visit to Utah and your 
clear and convincing arguments. You 
have made many friends.” 

F. A. Hazelbaker, Secretary State Central 
Committee, Montana: “Can Mrs. Robins 
give us six speeches for Hughes be¬ 
tween now and election. This will do 
more to carry Montana for Hughes than 
any other factor.” 

Jacob Dunn, President of the Illinois Watch 
Factory: “About 800 people employed in 
this establishment heard Mrs. Raymond 
Robins and greeted her statements on 
Hughes’s stand on labor with much ap¬ 
plause.” 

Mrs. Richard Yates, wife of Ex-Governor of 
Illinois: “Regret that every woman in 
Sangamon County could not have been 
present at the Hughes Alliance meeting. 
The impression made by the women is 
most far reaching.” 

Mrs. Richard Oglesby, wife of Ex-Governor 
of Illinois: “Feel that the women pre¬ 
sented their arguments in a very able 
and convincing manner.” 

Senator Logan of Illinois: “The Hughes Al¬ 
liance women are having a wonderful 
effect upon their women hearers in turn¬ 
ing the tide against Wilson on his slo¬ 
gan ‘He kept us out of war.’ ” 

John MacYicar, Mayor, Des Moines, Iowa, 
October 30, 1916: “The meeting held 
here by the women of the Hughes Spe¬ 
cial was probably the most effective po¬ 
litical meeting ever held in Des Moines; 
about five thousand were in attendance 
and the Republican ticket was greatly 
helped because of the splendid argu¬ 
ments presented.” 

Charles A. Rawson, Chairman Republican 
State Committee, Des Moines, Iowa, Oc¬ 
tober 30, 1916: “The meeting held in Des 
Moines by the ladies on the Hughes Spe¬ 
cial was a great success and the speeches 
were very convincing and I heard lots 
of active Republican workers say it was 
best meeting they ever attended. The way 
the large audience of five thousand peo¬ 
ple stayed through program showed 
their interest and this did the Republi¬ 
can ticket a lot of good.” 

Helen Bullis Kizer, Chairman Hughes Alli¬ 
ance, Spokane, Washington, October 21, 
1916: “I want to add my personal tes¬ 
timony as to the great value of the work 
done by the Women’s Committee in this 
part of the west. In spite of the fact 
that this is a suffrage state, there is, it 
seems to me, very much less interest in 
women as factors in public affairs than 
there is in the East. The train speakers 


32 


were a revelation—nothing less. I have 
heard man after man comment on the 
superiority of their method over that of 
the regular old-line male speaker. Num¬ 
bers went to hear them merely as a mat¬ 
ter of courtesy, out of curiosity, or be¬ 
cause they felt it a duty to support the 
campaign of their party, and came away 
enthusiastic ‘Boosters’ of the women 
both as women and as a political force. 
Whatever effect the passing of the train 
may have upon the outcome of the elec¬ 
tion—and it cannot help but have a fa¬ 
vorable one—its most valuable one, it 
seems to me, will lie in the education 
it has given both the men and the wom¬ 
en of those states remote from the great 
centers and more or less indifferent to 
their currents of thought, as to what our 
grandfathers used to call the ‘capacity’ 
of women. Another result of its passing 
will be its influence on future cam¬ 
paigns; they can scarcely remain as cut- 
and-dried, as steeped in traditions, as 
inept, again. You have set a new stand¬ 
ard for them.” 

Charles E. Severude, Chairman Polk County 
Central Committee, Des Moines, October 
SO, 1916: ‘‘I consider the Hughes Spe¬ 

cial Meeting held here to be by far the 
best effective of the campaign work done 
for the Republican ticket in this cam¬ 
paign. The speeches were effective and 
convincing. Wish we could have more 
meetings like it.” 

Francis R. Batement, St. Peter*s Rectory, 
Helena, Montana: ‘‘I will not mention 
names, for all did so well that might 
seem invidious. Mrs. Raymond Robins, 
however, stayed over to an evening meet¬ 
ing which was addressed by Mr. Fair¬ 
banks, and her address, which preceded 
his, was admirable in every way. It 
was a means of grace to hear her and in¬ 
deed to hear them all. They avoided all 
claptrap and set themselves to make a 
wise, womanly, sensible, warm-hearted 
appeal to an audience whose good opin¬ 
ion they won from the first.” 

Irving Howbert Colorado Springs, Colorado, 
October 30, 1916: ‘‘The recent meeting 
at the Opera House in Colorado Springs 
where the members of the Hughes Spe¬ 
cial spoke in behalf of Hughes was a 
great success and on behalf of the Re¬ 
publicans of Page County I wish to ex¬ 
press to you a great appreciation of the 
splendid service the members of your 
party tendered Mr. Hughes.” 

Horace O. Lunt, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 
October 30, 1916: ‘‘We congratulate you 
upon meetings held here under auspices 
of Women’s Hughes Campaign Train. 
They were a great stimulus to people of 
Colorado Springs. The sympathetic and 
intelligent manner in which the impor¬ 
tant campaign issues were discussed was 
a delight to every one. The train has 
been a great success and has already 


had a favorable effect upon the Hughes 
campaign in this section.” 

Fred R. Jelliff, Editor Republican Register, 
Galesburg, Illinois, October 30, 1916: 
‘‘The Hughes Women’s Special speakers 
were last Saturday met with the heart¬ 
iest sort of a reception and the crowd 
was so large that it was necessary to 
hold five separate meetings. The influ¬ 
ence of the meetings was pronounced 
and scores of women who before had 
been undecided announced their inten¬ 
tion of supporting Hughes. All the evi¬ 
dences now are that the women of Gales¬ 
burg will give Hughes a large vote. The 
demonstration was the largest political 
affair ever given by the women of the 
county.” 

W. E. Simonds, Dean of Knox College, Gales¬ 
burg, Illinois, October 30, 1916: ‘‘The 
whole affair was dignified and worthy 
of the cause. The speeches of Mrs. Nel¬ 
son O’Shaughnessy and Mrs. Raymond 
Robins were convincing and eloquent.” 

C. S. Cockley, Peoria, Illinois, October 30, 
1916: ‘‘Splendid meeting and fine pa¬ 
rade; everybody pleased with speeches.” 

Professor Fuller, Head of Department of So¬ 
cial Science, Lombard College, Gales¬ 
burg, III., October 30, 1916: ‘‘The 
Hughes Women’s Special was greeted 
by a large and enthusiastic crowd. 
Many voters voiced their approval of 
Mrs. Raymond Robins’ speech.” 

Annette B. Fitch, Peoria, Illinois, October 
30, 1916: ‘‘As Organizer in the 16th 
Congressional District under Miss Har¬ 
riet E. Vittum, I assure you that the 
women on the Hughes Women’s Special 
helped greatly in turning the tide to 
Hughes in Peoria and the 16th Congres¬ 
sional District.” 

Valentine Jobst, Peoria, Illinois, October 30, 
1916: ‘‘I, a lifelong Democrat, have 

turned my back on my party so far as 
the national ticket is concerned. With 
my family rode in the auto parade and 
listened attentively to the convincing ar¬ 
guments of the speakers of the Women’s 
Hughes Special at Hippodrome at Peo¬ 
ria.” 

Y. A. Grier, Peoria, Illinois, October 30,1916: 
‘‘Great meeting. Best speakers heard 
during campaign. Everyone enthusi¬ 
astic.” 

Alice R. Richards, Peoria, Illinois, October 
30, 1916: ‘‘Miss Freeman and other 
women who spoke at meeting of the 
Hughes Women’s Special Saturday aft¬ 
ernoon made many votes for Hughes. 
Of that I have positive knowledge.” 

Mrs. E. J. Parker; Mrs. E. N. Monroe, Chair¬ 
man; Mrs. Frank Crane; Mrs. Anna Cot¬ 
trell, Quincy, Illinois, October 30, 1916: 
‘‘We feel that the coming of the Hughes 
Special to Quincy has made at the very 
least 500 votes for Hughes.” 


38 


Charles H. Cottrell, Chairman, Quincy, III., 
Octol>er 30, 1916: “The Women’s Spe¬ 
cial was given a social reception here 
Saturday. The Orpheum Theatre was 
crowded and an overflow meeting was 
held on the street with one thousand 
in attendance. The coming of this splen¬ 
did lot of authors, speakers, and indus¬ 
trial workers has had a decided effect 


to turn the tide rapidly for Charles E. 
Hughes." 

George A. Stadden, President Franklin Life 
Insurance Co., Springfield, III., October 
30, 1916: “The women of the Hughes 
Train were enthusiastically received. 
They did untold good to the Republican 
cause.” 


III. Editorial Comments on the Hughes Campaign Train 

(Note: Some of these are Democratic papers.) 


Portland, Oregonian, Oct. 8: “These are 
among the most high-minded and dis¬ 
tinguished women of the country. Some 
are social workers, others are writers, 
others are prominent in charity and 
philanthropy, and all are worthy of the 
confidence and esteem of all classes. 

“Every one will recognize among this 
splendid group some one or more who 
has rendered service to mankind in 
some fine way—rendered real service, 
not merely talked about it. 

“Will any one dare say that these no¬ 
ble women who have chosen to become 
the guests of the National Republican 
Committee, or of Mrs. Belmont, et al.— 
whoever they are—are not moved by the 
purest motives?" 

“No one will say it, of course, but 
there is a species of blackguard journal¬ 
ism in Oregon which does not hesitate 
to insinuate it." 

New York, Herald, Oct. 16: “It must be ad¬ 
mitted that in some places there has 
been a lack of that chivalry toward these 
earnest, thinking women that is sup¬ 
posed to be inherent in Americanism. 
The effort to make it appear that they 
are touring the country as a sort of 
fashion show may seem to democratic 
politicians ‘good politics,’ but it is cheap 
politics. The names of the women in 
the party, the prominent part they have 
taken in the promotion of public wel¬ 
fare and their other good works furnish 
a complete answer to the ‘fashion 
show’ slur. The fact that their meetings 
have been well attended, especially in 
those states where women vote, shows 
that instead of being a failure or a mere 
joke the woman’s train is a success.” 

New York, Globe, Oct. 3: “What it can ac¬ 
complish in bringing to both men and 
women throughout the states visited the 
consciousness of the power of woman, 
of her full ability to cope with affairs 
of public interest, of her ability to put 
personal affairs and personal prejudice 
behind her, and to work for the public 
good, is overwhelmingly great. Although 
these women go out as campaign speak¬ 
ers, it is, after all, as women that the 
public will be interested in them. They 
are women who have accomplished 


much in many walks of life, who are ac¬ 
complishing much, and will accomplish 
still more. 

“The Women’s Campaign Train will 
go down in history significant, not so 
much for its value as a campaigning 
measure but for its potence in showing, 
as they have never been shown before, 
women’s place and power in modern- 
day affairs.” 

Chicago, Herald, Oct. 6: “He would be a 
churlish person indeed who could fail 
to give the women of the Hughes train 
credit for two extremely refreshing 
qualities in a presidential campaign. We 
mean both courage and candor. 

“When Miss Frances Kellor yesterday 
stood up before an audience of labor 
men and expressed her unfavorable opin¬ 
ion of Samuel Gompers, president of the 
American Federation of Labor, she 
might not have been playing good poli¬ 
tics; she might not have been right as 
to Mr. Gompers, but she certainly had 
her courage and her candor in full ac¬ 
tion. 

“By the same token the women are 
making no attempt whatever to disguise 
the source of the financing of the 
woman’s special. A statement issued by 
Mr. Hert, Republican campaign manager 
for the West, frankly gives the list of 
lady backers of the enterprise—the list 
beginning with the name of Mrs. Daniel 
Guggenheim. 

“In brief the women of the special are 
not trying to travel under false colors, 
no matter what they may be doing." 

Salt Lake, Deseret News: “For the first 
time in America the work of women in 
national politics is this year being se¬ 
riously taken by all the parties, and 
press and public share in the interest 
which their earnest entrance into the 
campaign has aroused. Their enthusi¬ 
asm is marked by nothing amateurish, 
spasmodic or timid—on the contrary it 
partakes of the courage and systematic 
strategy of the seasoned campaigner. 

“By all parties and classes it cannot 
help but be regarded as a significant and 
practical expression of women’s politi¬ 
cal co-operation with men from this 
time henceforth in the selection of the 
nation’s chief officials." 


34 


Cleveland, Leader, Oct. 4; “Yesterday a spe¬ 
cial train came to Cleveland which was 
devoted to the cause of woman suffrage. 
It had been paid for and set in motion 
by women who are eager to obtain the 
full use of the ballot for their sex. Some 
of them are very rich. Others have 
wealthy husbands. But they are work¬ 
ing for all of their own sex, for equal 
rights at the polls, not for any form of 
business interests or for anything which 
in any sense involves issues between the 
rich and the poor. 

“The whole effort to ridicule and make 
obnoxious the women’s campaign train 
was very dirty politics. It was also 
stupid.’’ 

Spokane, Chronicle, Oct. 13; “In Spokane 
they were accorded a reception due ear¬ 
nest and efficient workers. It was rep¬ 
resentative of the attitude of the Pacific 
coast toward the woman politician. In 
this country she is not made the victim 
of jests, but is heard and honored for 
the true value of her ideals.’’ 

Chicago, Evening Post, Oct. 6: “Almost 
every one is of the type of the women 
who have made their names known, not 
by being ‘billionairesses,’ but by working 
for some intelligent work of social re¬ 
form. 

“It is pretty cheap politics to try to 
discount the campaigning of such wom¬ 
en by unearthing the old bogy of 'Wall 
Street,’ to cry them down.’’ 

New York, Times, Oct. 4; “They are ear¬ 
nest, they are able; and in places which 
Mr. Hughes visited in his ‘preliminary 
campaign’ they should be especially wel¬ 
come, not merely for themselves, but for 
their contrast with the great movie ora¬ 
tor.’’ 

Brooklyn, Eagle, Oct. 6: “The Hughes Wom¬ 
en’s Campaign train ought to proceed 
over its prearranged itinerary, not de¬ 
viating a mile therefrom. If the women 
of the United States, represented by dis¬ 
tinguished members of their sex, do not 
command popular respect it is high time 
the fact was recognized and admitted." 

East St. Louis, Sun, Oct. 19: “Although the 
Democratic national committee has done 
everything possible to discredit the wom¬ 
en campaigners, they are having phe¬ 
nomenal meetings everywhere. Attempts 
to break up their audiences with coun¬ 
ter demonstrations have failed in every 
instance." 

Portland, Oregonian, Oct. 15; “The visiting 
women bore themselves with modesty 
and dignity. They asked to be heard, 
and for the most part they were heard. 
There is no wall of narrow provincial¬ 
ism about Oregon that would exclude 
from the forum of local discussion rep¬ 
utable voices from any other state or 
nation. But apprehensive and fearsome 
agents of the Wilson campaign have 


sought to raise it. They have failed, of 
course. Their tactics in their calum¬ 
nious attacks upon the visitors before 
their coming, and their scheme of row¬ 
dyism and riot after their arrival have 
cost their cause many votes." 

Denver, News, Oct. 9: “The net result is 
good. It helps toward the effect which 
Miss Kellor aims to produce. It gives 
the rather reluctant old-line politician 
a feeling that he does not need to worry 
so much about woman campaigners as 
he had feared. It teaches him that wom¬ 
en organized politically can be a self- 
supporting body, standing firmly on their 
own feet; that they are, in other words, 
a clear asset instead of a semi-liability. 

“By this proof the women justify Mr. 
Hughes in his declaration that women 
should be given full suffrage in the 
United States, directly and at once. 

Kewanee, Courier, Oct. 9: “The women of 
the Hughes special train, which recently 
passed through Illinois, are following 
what for want of a better term may be 
called ‘intelligent politics.’ They are all 
women with sincere convictions in re¬ 
gard to who ought to be the next presi¬ 
dent, just as usually men orators are 
sincere in their convictions in regard to 
the political needs of the country. They 
differ in method with some stump speak¬ 
ers, in that they appeal to the intelli¬ 
gence of their audience and succeed, in 
large measure, in escaping the beaten 
path of misconstruing the statements of 
the opposition, on the one hand, and, on 
the other, of substituting abuse for rea¬ 
son. 

“The Davenport Times, which knows 
the facts because the special stopped in 
Iowa cities, says these women demon¬ 
strated their ability also by the sys¬ 
tematic planning of a program, their 
adherence to a strict schedule and their 
ample provision for publicity. They not 
only knew what they were trying to do 
and why, but they knew how to do it. 

“It is significant of better things that 
women thus are taking an interest in 
affairs that are more than local. They 
are setting a higher standard for the po¬ 
litical meeting. They are making it 
more difficult for the old time stump 
speaker who, after being ‘delighted to 
see so many here to-day,’ recited trite 
arguments, appealed to partisan preju¬ 
dice and closed with a few words about 
‘the old flag.’ The stump speakers who 
follow where these women have been 
will have to talk facts and present the 
facts in an entertaining way if they 
wish to get a hearing." 

Portland, Evening Telegram, Oct. 14: “It 
is largely a matter of sour grapes. If 
the Democrats had thought of it first it 
would have been a heaven-born idea. 
Portland will nevertheless receive these 


35 


women with respect and consideration 
and make their welcome all the warmer 
because of the insults to which they 
have been subjected by their jealous 
rivals.” 

Philadelphia, Ledger, Oct. 30: “Large as¬ 
semblages listened with respect to ad¬ 
dresses that transcended politics and en¬ 
kindled patriotism, in a lucid and ef¬ 
fectual presentation of the reasons why 
Mr. Hughes should be chosen to succeed 
a presidency of garrulous vacillation. 
The cause has been brought to the fac¬ 
tories when the workers were unable to 
attend the meetings. All sorts and con¬ 
ditions of persons have been reached. 
The right of the public at large to com¬ 
plete and candid information has been 
recognized. The tour of the train has been 
a triumphant progress. The election of 
Mr. Hughes will owe much to the praise¬ 
worthy and persistent effort of the wom¬ 
en who undertook this country-wide cam¬ 
paign of education in his behalf.” 

East 8t. Louis, Sun, Oct. 17: “An unexpect¬ 
ed development of the fight is the cool¬ 
ness and good nature with which the 
women have received the Democratic 
attacks. Not once have they lost their 
heads; not once have they been diverted 
from the main issue—the election of 
Justice Hughes.” 

Salem, Statesman, Oct. 15: “They have a 
real, vital message, and they are in ear¬ 
nest in their support of Charles Evans 
Hughes, as they know he represents the 
highest ideals of Americanism, and that 
he will cause the United States to stand 
four square to all the world in the trying 
times ahead of this nation, both in its in¬ 
dividual capacity as such, and as a mem¬ 
ber of the great family of nations. The 
Hughes special is great, and it carries 
great women giving forth great ideas 
and a vital message. Not one who heard 
the women at the Grand opera house 
last night will disagree with these 
words.” 

Milwaukee, Evening Wisconsin, Oct. 19: 
“Even the most hardened reporter of 
political meetings has been surprised, if 
not delighted, by the freshness of 
phrase, wit and logic of the speeches 
made this week by the women ora¬ 
tors. After the eagle-screeching of the 
average male spellbinder the effect was 
calming and much more telling.” 

Culbertson, Montana, Searchlight, Oct. 21: 
“Outside the Democratic bullyragging, 
wherever the Hughes women have ap¬ 
peared, they have drawn large thinking 
audiences; they have received close at¬ 
tention and their arguments have been 
followed closely. Montana women are 
deeply concerned in this campaign, for 
the reason that upon the result of No¬ 
vember 7th depends the welfare of their 
homes for the next four years. 


“As a matter of fact, the Hughes special 
bears a party of wage earning women, 
women who work with their brains—an 
example the Democratic editors would 
be wise to emulate—and who at great 
financial loss to themselves, at great per¬ 
sonal discomfort and by numerous other 
sacrifices have undertaken, the long 
transcontinental swing solely because 
they believe the election of Mr. Hughes 
tends to the general prosperity of the 
country, which means the prosperity of 
the home and family.” 

Cincinnati, Star, Oct. 25: “The truth is that 
most of the women on board the Cam¬ 
paign Train are wage-earners who are 
unselfishly giving their time and effort 
to a cause they believe just. But the 
most ridiculous charge is that these 
women campaigners are traveling in the 
greatest luxury. A few months ago 
great remonstrance was caused by the 
fact that the Government had sent 
troops to the border in day coaches, not 
in Pullmans. Now it is objected that 
women are traveling in Pullmans for 
campaign purposes. For that is all the 
Women’s Campaign Train consists of, 
plain Pullmans of the commonest sleep¬ 
ing car variety.” 

Salt Lake, News, Oct. 23: “Never before in 
American politics have the women of the 
nation taken so active and aggressive a 
part as in the campaign now drawing to 
a close; and never before in the world 
has there been an incident so unique 
and spectacular in women's political ac¬ 
tivity as the campaign special train 
which has been on tour of the nation 
and is now in this city. 

“One enduring lesson, at least, may be 
drawn from the incident—and that is 
that women’s power and influence will 
never again be relegated to the inferior 
and inconsequential place in national 
affairs heretofore assigned to them. The 
sex has shown itself abundantly able to 
assert and maintain its rights, and ful¬ 
ly competent to exercise all the rights 
of citizenship hitherto withheld. 

“Their energy and courage are ad¬ 
mirable, and their earnestness and abil¬ 
ity are anew demonstrated at every 
place where the train stops. 

“Probably not all who meet and greet 
the fair visitors will vote for the particu¬ 
lar candidate whom they are supporting, 
but none can fail to be impressed by 
their sincerity and their skill. Certain¬ 
ly they constitute an ally for whose aid 
any cause should be grateful; and even 
the most self-confident candidate can 
well feel that he would rather have them 
with him than against him.” 

Waterloo, Courier, Oct. 14: “There are many 
perplexing social and human problems 
that under the complexity of twentieth 
century life cannot be adequately han¬ 
dled any longer by mere state legisla- 


86 


tion, and these women, who are versed 
in these questions, want to see a man 
in the president’s chair who will handle 
them from the viewpoint of nationalism 
instead of the outgrown and outworn 
doctrine of state’s rights. 

“Here is the secret of the women’s 
campaign special and of the ardor of its 
speakers for Hughes.’’ 

San Francisco, Chronicle: “All of the wom¬ 
en Hughes committee hut two earn their 
livelihood by their own hands and 
brains. They are women distinguished 
by their work in human service, and es¬ 
pecially for the better interests of 
women. 

Portland, Oregonian, Oct. 13: “It is well to 
inquire of envious and contemptuous 
Democratic critics what they think of 
the above list? Are these women the 
minions and tools of Wall Street? Are 
they engaged in a nefarious scheme to 
deceive the public by giving proper cre¬ 
dentials to sundry luxurious creatures, 
who are said (falsely) to be coming to 
Oregon to tell the intelligent and inde¬ 
pendent people of this state how to vote? 

“Or are they preparing reception 
and entertainment for brave, strong and 
good women who have done noble serv¬ 
ice for humanity in various lines of en¬ 
deavor and are coming as free Ameri¬ 
cans to discuss issues of moment with 
other Americans?’’ 

Des Moines, Tribune, Oct. 24: “The impor¬ 
tance of the continent-wide tour being 
made by the women of the Hughes spe¬ 
cial is not limited to suffrage states, and 
it has been recognized by the Democrats, 
as witness the herculean efforts to dis¬ 
credit the party. 

“Nearly every woman on this special 
train earns her own living and has risen 
to a place of public importance through 
her own unaided efforts yet as soon as 
the train started west, the Wilson cam¬ 
paign managers sought to place the stig¬ 
ma of wealth upon it. 

“The women who are coming to Des 
Moines next Thursday are real cam¬ 
paigners, and they will give sound argu¬ 
ments for the election of Hughes.’’ 

Oakland, Tribune, Oct. 18: “The composition 
of the Women’s Hughes Traveling Cam¬ 
paign Committee is significant proof of 
the general and deep interest women of 
every walk of life are taking in the pres¬ 
ent campaign. Most conspicuous in the 
personnel of the ‘flying squadron’ are 
women whose life work has brought 
them to an intimate understanding of 
the handicaps under which their sex is 
living, who can speak from experience 
and whose cry for the rights of woman¬ 
hood is sincere in spirit and honest in 
purpose.’’ 

Waterbury, American, Oct. 5: “We will 
trust this group of capable women to 


give a good account of themselves. There 
are enough of them so that no one need 
speak more than once a day or once in 
two or three days, if it is necessary to 
rest and recover from hoarseness. It 
is a good sign that women of both sides 
in the suffrage fight can forget their dif¬ 
ferences and fight together for a com¬ 
mon political cause.’’ 

ISlew York, Tribune, Oct. 4: “And such a 
matter-of-fact proceeding as the wom¬ 
en’s tour for Hughes is a tiny log show¬ 
ing how fast the stream flows. Twenty- 
five years from now we shall probably 
be wondering why society ever was 
dunce enough to do what it did—to shut 
out from its most important concerns 
one whole half of the human race and 
that the most interesting. Naturally, 
politics has been dull. What exclusively 
masculine affair is not!’’ 

St. Paul, Pioneer-Press, Oct. 7: “St. Paul 
will welcome these distinguished women 
rather in the capacity of advance agents 
of a political condition unquestionably 
inevitable than as exponents of the suc¬ 
cess of any particular equality than are 
interested in the political fortunes of 
any presidential candidate. All will be 
gallant enough to doff their hats to this 
feminine skirmish line even though 
some may oppose its purpose and others 
dislike the means chosen to promote 
that purpose. They are women visitors; 
and that is sufficient.’’ 

North Bedford, Standard, Sept. 29: “But 
forgetting, if that is possible, that the 
women’s impersonal-as-to-suffrage move¬ 
ment is chiefly concerned to win Mr. 
Hughes’ election in the interest of 
strength for a federal woman-suffrage 
law, one is fain to admire its pluck and 
its zeal—and its artfulness that is 
worthy to be known as artistry.’’ 

Philadelphia, Press, Oct. 5: “An entirely 
new feature in this Presidential canvass 
is the organization of women for cam¬ 
paign work. 

“Their trans-continental campaign 
should both increase the number of male 
equal suffragists and gain votes where 
they are needed for Hughes and Fair¬ 
banks.’’ 

Baltimore, American, Oct. 5: “A decade or 
two hence the women will be doing the 
real work of brains and hustling in po¬ 
litical campaigns, with issues that cen¬ 
ter not in any one department of inter¬ 
est such as they are now drawn to. And 
the prospect is interesting as viewed 
through the vistas of the first delegation 
of women definitely to take the stump. 
The Republican party is first in this 
departure.’’ 

New York, Times, Oct. 6 (Wilson supporter): 
“Compared to the common or garden 
spellbinder, they are, of course, notably 
pleasing spectacles, their speeches are 


37 


well up to the ordinary campaign stand¬ 
ard, and they have shown courage and 
good temper in situations that must 
have been distinctly trying. The only 
plausible explanation is a widely per¬ 
vasive inclination to resent the intru¬ 
sion of women as active and audible par¬ 
ticipants in an important election.” 

St. Joseph, Gazette, Oct. 29: “If the ratio 
of workers found in the ‘Hughes special’ 
is to be maintained in all future partici¬ 
pation by the feminine sex in politics, 
another menace to male supremacy in 
this field is presented. For when wom¬ 
en everywhere shall vote, they will not 
look with approval upon vagrant men 
delving into the science of government 
while femininity does the same thing 
and holds down a paying position as 
well. There will surely result such a re¬ 
forming of present methods as usually 
follows a woman’s determination that 
the man who doesn't work shall not 
show up at mealtime.” 

Butte, Post, Oct. 18: ‘‘The women whom the 
democratic campaigners slur are, to say 
the least, consistent and logical as well 
as earnest in their course when they 
prefer Hughes for the presidency. And 
it is prevailing belief, as election day 
gets nearer, that their preference will 
have much to do with the election of 
Hughes.” 

Bismarck, Tribune, Oct. 8 (Wilson supporter): 
‘‘The object of the ‘Hughes Special’ is to 
promote the candidacy of Charles Evans 
Hughes. This is its sole business. 

‘‘Members of the party have national 
reputations as social welfare workers. 
They believe that the election of Hughes 
will do more to advance the principles 
for which they stand than Wilson. 

‘‘Turn out and hear them.” 

2^cw York, Globe, November 20: ‘‘The Pub¬ 
licity Bureau of the Democratic Nation¬ 
al Committee is pluming itself on what 
it regards as an enterprising and meri¬ 
torious piece of work during the recent 
campaign—namely, the successful! mis¬ 
representation of the women’s train. 

‘‘It is asserted that the accessions that 
came to the President from the ‘bone- 
head’ proceedings that irritated the Pro¬ 


gressives, and from the successful woo¬ 
ing of the Mormon vote, and from creat¬ 
ing the false idea that a compulsory 
w^age increase act was an eight-hour act 
—that all these things, though each was 
essential to the result, would not have 
been enough except the women of the 
west had been persuaded that a bunch 
of millionaire women sought to instruct 
them. 

‘‘When the women’s special started, a 
description of it as a train de luxe was 
sent out, the public is informed, to 7,000 
newspapers. The members of the party 
were pictured as diamond-bedecked, fur- 
wearing women, who were out seeking 
diversion. In the way of ‘follow-ups' 
stories were sent out of complaints made 
because local committees did not load 
their cars with candy and flowers. It 
was said that before going to calls they 
were accustomed to ask whether the oc¬ 
casion was one when rings were to be 
worn in or out. Preposterous reports 
were circulated as to the estimated 
wealth of the women in the party, and 
one of them was quoted as saying it was 
not true they were all rich—that ‘there 
were several among us who haven’t over 
$50,000 a year.’ 

‘‘Of course, this was all invention, and 
is now confessed. But it is gleefully said 
that the trick worked; that when one of 
the campaigners appeared in an old and 
dingy dress the crowd was told: ‘See 
how these rich women are trying to 
fool you,’ and when their garb was bet¬ 
ter, ‘See how these rich women are try¬ 
ing to patronize you.’ Vance McCor¬ 
mick, not unacquainted with Yale’s 
‘gold coast,’ must feel proud of the la¬ 
bors done under his direction—must feel 
especially proud of the boasting now be¬ 
ing indulged in. 

‘‘Mr. McCormick’s young men over¬ 
estimated their astuteness. It is highly 
improbable that any considerable num¬ 
ber of women were deceived by the 
‘golden special’ nonsense. At a few 
places headliners were stimulated into 
activity, but the great body of women, 
although new in politics, were sufficient¬ 
ly intelligent not to be caught by such 
old stuff.” 


38 




( 








mmmmmmMmmi 

■,? v-v^^<v;.'. -vy,v : :,:y'’'-X-.X' '■'"::/'^-^-'>iVX' •: 

v‘- t '■’'‘^'k'"-^i\’/''"'-'’P ‘''}':t‘ I'- ‘v.'. 
<'.v-'Y';v;'XX v*-;'X’v 



McConnell Press, Inc. 
52-58 Duane St„ N. Y, 








